PROBLEMS IN PLANNING URBAN SCHOOL FACILITIES · SCHOOL PLANT ADMINISTRATION SERIES PROBLEMS IN PLANNING URBAN SCHOOL FACILITIES I 0E-21023 Bulletin 1964, No. 23 By WILLIAM W. CHASE,

SCHOOL PLANT

ADMINISTRATIONSERIES

PROBLEMS IN PLANNING

URBAN SCHOOL FACILITIES

I

0E-21023Bulletin 1964, No. 23

By WILLIAM W. CHASE, SpecialistSchool Plant Administration

U.S. DEPARTMENT OFHEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

Anthony J. CelebresseSecrwary

Office of EducationFrancis )(nivelCommissioner

U. S. DEPOSITORY COPY

DO NOT DISCARD

FOREWORD

The increase in the population of the United States and the rapidmovement of people from rural to urban areas continue to createmany problems in the great cities. Overcrowding of residentialareas, confestion of streets and highways, increased demands forcity services, and Ow changing social patterns of cities contributeto these problems. To solve them, immediate and long-range goalsmust be cooperatively established and striven for. Even thoughmany of the legally constituted agencies such as the school systems,hoards of health, highway departments, city planning commissions,and others are quite independent of one another, there is an essenceof interdependence necessary to successful planning. Each agencywould be in a better position to fulfill its own functions and objec-tiVes if it had an awareness of the problems of the other agencies.

This study, an attempt to identify characteristic problems inplanning school facilities in metropolitan central cities, is one effortto acquaint the various planning groups with at least one phase ofthis very important and overall community interest.

ERIC R. BABELAssistant Commissioner,

1)i.ivi. ion of Elementary and Secondary EducationFRED F. lizAcm,Director, Administration Branch

FOREWORD

CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Page

III

IvSECTION 1: INTRODUCTION

The ProblemPurpose of the StudyProcedures of the Study 4

SECTION II: THE METROPOLITAN CENTRALCITIES AN OVERVIEW 6

Population Trends_ 6Socioeconomic Factors 9Land Use and Controls

11Metropolitan Planning 13

SECTION III: SCHOOL- FACILITIES PLANNING PROB-LEMS

15Urban Renewal Projects 15

Urban Renewal and the Schools 16School Costs and Financing 17Problems of Planning 18Problems of Population Shifts 20School-Site Problems 20Zoning Problems.. 21Authority and Control 21

Expressway Development 22Costs and Financing 26Planning 27Authority and Control 29

Zoning Regulations and Housing Codes 29Planning_ Ark 31

Building Codes _ _ 32Planning 33Authority and Control 33

Construction Costs and Financing 34Construction Costs 35Financing Regulations 36Planning 37Construction and Design 37

CONTENTS

SECTION IIIContinuedEducational Program Planning

PlanningDesign.

Population MovementSocioeconomic Implications

Site Limitations ..'community Relations.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW GUIDEA PPEN DIX B: REGIONAL OFFICES OF THE HOUSING

AND HOME FINANCE AGENCY

TABLE

Populktion and Rate of Change of SMSA's by Regions, for theUnited States, 1960 and 1950

V

Poor

3941

4245464749

51

55

63

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study was based on the information obtained through inter-views with the general superintendents and/or the associate super-intendents in charge of school-facilities planning in the 50 largestcities in the United States. The interview guide that. was used wasprepared as' the result of a -day conference at which the schoolplanning authorities representing 13 of these cities discussed prob-lems of greatest concern to thew.

Special acknowledgment is due to all of these officials for theirwilling and cooperative emit ributions, and to Dr. Glenn C. Boer-rigter for his assistance at the beginning of the study.

The author also wishes to express thanks to I)r. Bernard E.Donovan, Executive. Deputy Superintendent of Schools, Board ofEducation, City of New York; to I)r. Edwin A. Lederer, AssociateSuperintendent. in Charge-of Operation Services, Board of Educa-tion, Chicago, Ill.; and to others who made comments and suggestionsin reviewing the final drafts of the study.

VI

Section I

INTRODUCTION

THE PROBLEM

Problems in planning school facilities are, at best, complex. Theyexist to some degree in virtually every school district in this coun-try, but in metropolitan central cities (see p. 3) they are becomingincreasingly severe. These problems, their implications, and theeffects they may have on immediate and long-range planning areof utmost inqxwtance not only to scluxd planning officials but toall other officials responsible for planning the development of urbanareas.

In describing changes which affect overall planning, LutherGulick stated :

Until very recently, this countr3ramf ours was primarily an agriculturalnation with a small proportion of industry. Now it is primarily an Indus-trial country, with a small proportion of agriculture . . . Great citieswhich were Mee clearly defined are overriding their boundaries, spreadingout over rural areas and small villages, so that in heavily industrialregions there is no clear demarcation separating one urban area fromanother. Our once self - contained small towns are no longer self-depend-ent. They must use ninny facilities such as distribution centers, financialInstitutions. communication systems which lie outside their borders. Theyare integral parts of their urban are`"

Gulick also pointed out that as the life of communities, haschanged, so have the lives of the individuals in those communities.Formerly, they were quite self-sufficient in that they met their ownneeds with their own skills. There is now a division of labor, orspecialization, that creates an interdependence requiring people tolive within easy access of one another. A new type of society isemerging which is based on technical services. As better service isobtained through specialization and greater production through uti-lization of power, machinery, and automation, a new pattern of close

'Comments from a speech delivered at a conference on lictropolitan A reel Problemv,held at Emory University, Atlanta, Ga.. Apr. 10 12. 1961.

sio

2 PROBLEMS IN PLANNING

human association has been developed with a verbal, ideological.Sad physical communication system of high concentration and in-temingled complexity. Thus, as cities have spread and towns havebecome interdependent, people have been moving closer to or intothe urban centers.'

Many physical requirements are imposed as this trend becomesintensified and the urban centers expand. Among them are prop-erly planned sys-tems of transportation, modernization, residentialhousing, development of utilities, and the expansion of ectucationand the schools. All are so completely interrelated and interde-pendent that the success of one is predicated on the other. Trans-portati4n is an indispensable link in the whole productive process.With increased use of automobiles and trucks, highways and streetsof urban areas are essential to provide for the movement of peopleto and from their daily work, the movement of raw materials tothe factories, and the distribution of the finished products. Rail-oads are still indispensable in those communities built upon rail

communication.The modernization and construction of factories and offices in the

major citie has meant central management programing, scheduling, and the development of large plants with their subsidiaries.Automation and electronics have cut down inventories far belowthose previously thought necessary.

The development of housing in the central cities has resulteddrastic changes in planning and design. There has been increasedneed for utilities to supply power for the commercial, industrial, andresident ial expansion.

All of these activities are largely dependent upon the educationalprograms developed in each of the centers. The kind of urbanizedcivilization toward which this country is progressing can materializeonly with a highly educated population and a society which equipspeople of particular capacities and aptitudes to progress in the useof their special abilities.

Public school systems in fliese areas reflect efforts to meet therapidly developing needs. The effectiveness with which they maycontinue to do so means, however, that all of the local planningagencies must collaborate in determining goals and objectives, miniintegrate basic, long-range comprehensive planning, and must col-laborate again in carrying these plans into effect..

If one takes an overview of the problems of school facilities inthe metropolitan central cities, one sees that they have been devel-

Ibid.

*),

.4p

URBAN SCHOOL FACILITIES 3

oping for a long period of time. During World War II few newbuildings were constructed, while those in existence were deteriorat-ing and, in some cases, becoming obsolete. Rapid populationgrowth, shifts in population, special services that are required be-cause of existing social and technological conditions, and other con-ditions referred to previously combine to further complicate school-facilities planning in the metropolitan central cities.

This study was undertaken to compile, identify, and describecharacteristic problems of school-facilities planning in metropolitancentral cities. The study was confined to the 50 largest cities inthe United States, as shown by the population report from the censusof 1960. These cities and their official 1960 census populationii areas follows:

Rankat 1060OPIUM

City PopulationRank

at 1960census

City Population

1 i New York, N.Y 7. 781. 984 26 Indianapolis, Ind 476.2662 Chicago, Ill 3, 660. 404 27 Kansas City, Mo.. .... 476

Los Anggeeles, Calif. 2.479.016 28 Columbus, Ohio... . 164 Philade plila, Pa. 2.002, 512 29 Phoenix, Ariz .1706 Detroit, hitch 1, 670, 144 30 Newark, N.J. ....... 405,2206 Baltimore, Md 939.024 31 Louisville, Ky ....... 390.6397 Houston, exT 938.219 32 Portland, Oreg 372,6788 Cleveland, Ohio. 876.060 iq Oakland, Calif 367.5489 Washington, D C 763,966 34 Fort Worth; Tex 356, 261

10 St. Louis, fete . 760.026 Long Beach, Calif_ 344,16811 Ran Francisco Calif 742.885 36 Birmingham Ala 340.88712 Milwaukee, Wis 741,324 3'7 Oklahoma City, Okla 324.26313 Boston, Mass 097.197 Rochester, N.Y... 318, 61114 Dallas, Tex. 679.684 39 Toledo, Ohio 318.00615 New Orleans, La 027.628 40 St. Paul, Minn 313,41116 Pittsburgh lie 004.337 41 Norfolk, Va. 103.8 87217 San Antonio, Tex 667.718 42 Omaha, Nebr. 301,50818 San Dier, Calif . 573.224 43 Honolulu, Hawaii 294.19419 Seattle, Waah 667,087 44 Miami, Fla 291.61820 Buffalo, N.Y 632.759 45 Akron, Ohio 290,36121 Cincinnati, Ohio . 602. 660 46 El Peso Tex. 776,08772 Memphis, Tenn 497.524 47 Jersey City, N.J... . 276,10123 Denver, Colo. 493.687 48 Tamytonpa, Fla. 274.9702428

Atlanta, OsMinneapolis, Minn....

487.458482.872

49ao

Da,Min, Okla

to 262.332201,686

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

Although this study has been limited to an investigation of theschool-facilities planning problems in metropolitan central cities, itis readily evident that many and varying degrees of the planningproblems exist in every community. It, is also evident that. theplanning of school facilities is but one important aspect of both theimmediate and long-range planning processes in any city, area, orregion, and that this aspect must be properly coordinated withinthe total scheme. For example, complete cooperation between

TIT-013 0-64-2

L


school officials and urban renewal planners is imperative if a pro-posed renewal project and the school serving the area affected areto succeed. The identification and description, therefore, of theproblems of school-facilities planning in this study will, it ishoped, provide insights for better and more thorough communitydevelopment.

In the pursuit of this investigation, it was found that certainschool-facilities planning problems were evident in some cities butdid not necessarily exist in others. For example, school officialsinterviewed in two of the cities indicated that, because there hadbeen no urban renewal projects undertaken in either city, neitherhad encountered any problems of planning attributable to this par-ticular activity. Should either of these cities eventually undertakea renewal project., however, the findings of this study may well aidthe planners of both that project and of school facilities in antici-pating and resolving potential problems.

PROCEDURES OF THE STUDY

As a first step in this study, school planning officials representing13 metropolitan central city school systems met to discuss theirfacilities planning problems. Problems mentioned, regardless oftheir prevalence or degree of seriousness, were tentatively classi-fied and grouped under nine major headings. These, in randomorder, were as follows:

1. Urban renewal2. Expressway development8. Zoning regulations4. Building codes5. Construction costs and financing6. Educational program planning7. Population movement8. Site needs9. Community relations

Each of these major areas was analyzed carefully in terms of itssubproblems and its interrelatedness with the other major problemareas. On the basis of this discussion an interview guide (see p. 55)was constructed for use in personal interviews with school planningofficials in the 50 cities in the study to determine their planning prob-lems. Since the importance of the study lies mainly in its effort toidentify as nearly as possible the variety of problems involved inthis phase of the educational program and the relationship of school-facilities planning problems to the overall problems of metropolitan


central city planning, no attempt was made to place a numericalvalue on the responses.

In keeping with the intent of the study to compile, identify, anddescribe characteristic problems of school-facilities planning, no efforthas been made to provide solutions to the problems. Occasional ref-erences may be made to situations which have been resolved, butthese are mainly for the purpose of illustration. It is hoped that,eventually, depth studies of each of the problem areas can be madeand solutions found which will either eliminate completely or at leastminimize the particular problem.

In the meantime the problems enumerated in this study make itobvious that planning school facilities cannot be isolated from otheraspects of urban planning. It is also a reminder that planning offi-cials, including school officials themselves, may, because of their ownparticular interests, overlook or disregard the overall planningfunction.

41.

Section II

THE METROPOLITAN CENTRAL CITY-AN OVERVIEW

POPULATION TRENDS

The story of population growth in the United States during thedecade 1950-60 continued to be found in the trends associated withcity growth. Statistics show that the population increase duringthat decade was 17.5 percent, of which 80 percent was accounted forby the Nation's metropolitan areas.'

Metropolitan central city areas have approximately 58.0 millioninhabitants and their outlying areas another 54.9 million. In 1960there were 212 Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas in the UnitedStates; 204 of these had gained in population since the 1950 census,but only 8 such areas had lost population.'

The Bureau of the Budget has established and defined StandardMetropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSA's) as follows :

One city with 50,000 or more inhabitants or two cities with contiguousboundaries and constituting, for general economic and social purposes, asingle community with a combined population of at least 50,000, thesmaller of which must have a population of at least 15,000.

If two or more adjacent counties each have a city of 50,000 inhabitantsor more or twin cities with a combined population of 50,000 or more andthe cities are within 20 miles of each other (city limits to city limits),htey will be included in the same area unless there is definite evidencethat the two cities are not economically and socially Integrated!

Trends in metropolitan growth and rates of change from 1950 to1960 are illustrated in the accompanying table. It may be seen that in1950 there were 89.3 million persons in SMSA's but by 1960 the num-ber of persons in those areas had grown to 112.9 milliona growth of26.4 percent. It is significant, however, that during the same period

1 0.8. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Press release, June so, 1960.p. 8.'U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of the Census. United State, Omens of Pop.!atlas lliff. Washington : U.8. Government Printing ClElee, 1961. p. XXVII.*Executive omce of the President, Bureau of the Budget. Standard Metropolitan Stntiotical dress. O.B. Government Printing 0Mce, 1961. p. a.

6


the central cities increased by 5.6 million persons, or 10.7 percent,while the suburban areas surrounding the central cities expanded48.6 percent. The pattern of increase varied considerably amongthe regions. The population in and outside metropolitan areas ofthe Northeast increased at about the same rate (13.0 and 13.5 per-cent, respectively), that of central cities decreased by 3.2 percent,and that of the suburban ring increased by 34.8 percent. In thenorth-central States the rate of increase in metropolitan areas was23.5 percent, while that outside was 6.6 percent.. Central cities in-creased by 4.3 percent and the suburban rings increased by 56.4percent.

Population and Rate of Chang. of SMSA's, by Regions, for the United States, 1960 and 1950'

Regions and component parts

United StatesIn 8M8A's

Central citiesOutside central citiesOutside E1M 8 A 's

NbrUseastIn 8 M 8A 's

Central citiesOutside central citiesOutside 8 M 8 A 'a

North centralIn 8 M BA 's

Central citiesOutside central citiesOutside 8 M 8A 's

SputaIn 8 M A 's

Central cities \Outside central citiesOutside IIM BA 's

weeIn 8M 8A 's

Central citiesOutside central citiesOutside MBA's_

1960 1960

Total change, 1950 to1960

Number Percent

112, 886.178 69, 318 903 23,568,776 26 4

58 004. 334 52.386 642 6,618,692 10.7M. NO. 644 36, 931.261 17,949,583 48. 6

7. 1T

66.346, 606 31, 287.109 4.079, 336 13.0

17E21, 731 17.896,694 -573, 963 -3.218, 024, 774 13, 371, 475 4.663, 299 34.8

13.6

30, 959, 981 25, 074. 674 5, KZ, 287 23.6

16, 610,746 16.836, 686 674.090 4.314, 449, 218 9, 238, 018 5,211,197 664

66

26, 447.396 19, 417.751 7.029, 644 36 2

15.061, 777 11.720,11.728,843 3, 340,934 26 511.386, 618 7, MC 908 3.686 710 47.9

2. 7

20,131. 317 13, 587.309 6 575,008 46 8

9,110. 080 6. 932. 449 2,177,631 31.411,021. 237 6, 624.860 4.896, 377 06 4

19.0

This table Is adapted from pp. X XV and X XVI of the Closeted Sates Camas of PoyaMt NM. U.B.Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Wsehhigton: U.8. Government Prfnting OfBoe, 1961.

The population of the SMSA's in the South, as shown in the table,increased at a rate 13 times as great as the population living out-side such areas (36.2 percent v. 2.7 percent). The central cities inthis region increased by 28.5 percent and that of the suburban ringincreased by 47.9 percent. The highest rate of growth in SMSA's


during the 10-year period was in the western region. There, thepopulation of the metropolitan areas increased by 19 percent. Therate of increase for central cities was 31.4 percent and that outsidethe central cities was 66.4 percent.

Population increased the most rapidly in the SMSA's of 500,000to 1 million in size. In the five SMSA's with populations greaterthan 3 million, the central cities grew only 1 percent while the sub-urban rings increased 71 percent. However, in the smaller metro-politan areas the growth of the central city was greater than thatof the outlying area: the rate of central city growth was 29 percent

- = g .. .,.. I' a ... 4 - ., -. yik.. . a- - , 4 .... --1. . 76,. .

II, -a. .... t.. .Z...1" .. . ...a ..,

* ...

/IN

e

'.'. NI .- . .... V11.....

- _ It...4,'tx- "I

I . 1116 -. 1 1 ." 6";'i t 11- .o

A. - es \ ....o.,. ..

I M. , 1 .. 1.- ,,.,44 1,..^ I 1... -...s. `_

.. -I- no, - ,._Af;-, ,,, ', '-ic.... ... .. . ' C.. '''' `,_,..- .v ....,146,- . v 11 .. -.Or ... ... Alt /.

.1 --s. .

Croat*: Library, National Hooting Center

Meiropolitcm central cities in the United States am losing lcags segments of their popula-tions to suburban areas, many of which resemble the one shown above. The suburbandwellers often continue to work in the city and use Its public services, but pay the bulkof their taxes elsewhere.

and that of the outlying areas 11 percent.' Much of the populationgrowth in central cities is due to annexation of surrounding suburbanterritory; thus, of the 10.7 percent increase of population in centralcities since 1950, 9.3 percent has been due to annexations. Thesmallest amount of change resulting from central city annexationsoccurred in metropolitan areas with populations of 8 million.'

4 Ibid., p. XXVI.Ibid., p. XXVI.

URBAN SCHOOL FACILMIDS 9

SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS

Migration of persons in and out of central cities as well as migra-tion within these cities has a profound influence on the character ofthe city. Amos H. Hawley 6 reports that in Michigan, in the Detroitand Flint metropolitan areas, only G percent of the householdheads were born and raised in those areas. Approximately 20 per-cent migrated to the suburbs from outstate Michigan, but. ofespecial significance is the fact that nearly 75 percent of the presentsuburban inhabitants have migrated directly to the suburban areafrom the central city. Also, it can be observed that, when thecentral city migrants were replaced, it was usually by migrantsfrom farms and small towns, and, as a rule, the socioeconomic andeducational levels of the latter were somewhat, lower than those ofthe people they replaced.

Hawley' further stated,Now it is well known that the suburban areas attract to themselves

people who, by contrast with the residents of the central city, are rela-tively young, well educated, in the upper Income categories, and, of nosmall importance, are members of households made up of husband, wife,and children. The differences are of the order of 5 to 6 years in medianage, 1 to 2 years of school completed, $1,000 in median annual income.and 50 percent more incomplete families.

It is interesting to note that while the suburbs are attracting people whoare like those already residing there and who differ significantly fromcentral city residents, the people who move into central cities from sub-urbs exhibit a corresponding selectivity : they are similar to central cityresidents and noticeably different from suburban residents. They arenot, as some people have wishfully thought, representative of upper social-economic levels. Persons who leave the Suburbs for central cities arerather persons of modest incomes, with on the average less than a highschool education, and they are employed for the most part in clerical anddomestic service occupations. Their family composition is their mostdistinctive featurethey are single persons, childless couples or coupleswhose children have left the nest, and often members of broken families.

The significance of these migration trends is that central city areasare being changed socially, economically, and culturally.

There are various aspects within the complex of the metropolitanarea which affect the economic lives of both the central city and itssuburban ring. The demands upon the central city to provide manyof the amenities of city life desired by those living in the suburbs isquite apparent. The operating costs of the city governments are

Amos H. Hawley. "The Challenge of Population Change." Michigan Municipal Re'kw. January 1981.

7 MK

1


increased by the number of people living around the cities. Theiruse of the city's streets, commercial districts, and recreational andcultural facilities add to the costs of police and fire protection, streetmaintenance, and other general maintenance, although general main-tenance may tend to diminish somewhat as the suburban cities beginto provide their own facilities.

Industry and business constitute an important segment of themetropolitan central city; thus, trends in their activities influencemuch of what happens in the entire metropolitan area. Faced withnew technology, the need for new equipment, the need for morespace for employee and customer parking, and required extra spacefor organization of work on one floor, many industries have beenforced to build modern new plants on large sites outside the citylimits rather than remain on the old central city site. When in-dustry moves away from a central city, the city not only fails to getthe value of the new plant, but also loses the value of the old plantand of auxiliary businesses. Furthermore, an automated industryor business which moves to the suburbs often leaves behind thosecitizens who are the least able or the least willing to be retrainedand moved with the business.

Another detrimental effect of this change is that cityis left with a smaller tax base, on which it must carry a progres-sively larger tax load. Persons who have already migrated to thesuburbs but who retain property in the central city area becomemore concerned with taxes than with needed central city servicessuch as libraries, health facilities, police and fire protection, andschools. Ordinarily, during this very period of decreasing tax base,more elaborate and more expensive services are required becauseof inherent metropolitan problems. For example, the assessedvaluation in Detroit, Mich., has decreased approximately $200 mil-lion in the past 2 years, while both the school enrollments and neededstudent services have increased.'

Technoloiy has created a trend which affects central 'city areasby decreasing the demand for skilled and semiskilled labor. Atsame time, more and more youths are arriving at an employablfage and are ready for the nonexistent unskilled jobs. If theseyouths and other persons with little training are to become employ-able, more specialized training and guidance must be available for

Federal Grants to States for !Mesentery and Secowdary Schools (hearinp before theHouse of Representatives General Subcommittee on Education). Washington: V.S. Cloyeroment Printing Office, 192.


them, and such training will necessitate correspondingly moteschool facilities in the already heavily tax-burdened metropolitancentral city.

LAND USE AND CONTROLS

The corporate boundaries of many large metropolitan centralcities are quite specifically established and limited. Therefore,land development standards in those areas must be well defined,understood, and enforced. Comprehensive land-use plans are gener-ally implemented by zoning, subdivision controls, and official map-ping. Land-use controls must be sensitive to social and economicneeds of a community if they are to be effective. Okoasionally, in-congruous situations occur, since zoning is a negative way of induc-ing desired land use. A more positive approach for governing landuse is through legislative acts, real estate tax exempt?ns, long-termloans with low interest rates, and urban renewal granks. However,at present, zoning still is one of the most widely used methods ofregulating land use even though the zoning regulations of one politi-cal or municipal area may adversely affect a contiguous area. Toillustrate this point, one may cite Milwaukee County, where thereare 19 municipalities that can establish zoning regulations withoutdetermining the effects of their regulations on nearby municipali-ties, Zoning, unfortunately, has another weakness in some instancesin that some politically appointed citizens, who have little technicalknowledge, use it in the absencapf prior planning. Under such cir-cumstances, zoning cannot provide the kind of protection for whichit was intended.

A number of cities have building and housing codes that affectpublic as well as private establishments. Generally, these codestend to regulate such things as lighting, ventilation, sanitation, struc-tural design, fire safety, and even occupancy. However, if thesecodes are based on detailed specifications rather than on perform-

\ ance standards, they may be more detrimental than beneficial, espe-cially as new materials and construction practices develop. Theact that State and local or city codes are sometimes conflicting in

n ure also results in confusion to persons concerned with buildingsan nstruction.

Bo urban renewal and expressway development activities greatlyaffect land-use activities of a central city. These activities may

'Charles Ball. "Milwaukee Land Dee and Zoning." Truffle Quarterly, October 1969.71#918


cause heavy expenditures by the local government, although bothare generally and largely subsidized by the ,State and/or Federalgovernmelr'..They may displace persons and cause populationshifts, lough such changes might occur in any event with the ob-sole nee of housing and for other reasons. They may cause re-m1 al of taxable property from the city tax rolls, at least tempo.

rily in the case of the urban renewal developments. This loss maybe partially offset by a credit in lieu of taxes until the project land iscleared and ready for development. Many of the dispossessed resi-dents and business establishments move elsewhere within the corpo-rate limits and eventually replace or often improve property valuesthere. Land adjacent to urban renewal land expressway develop-ment projects generally rises- in value when the improvements havebeen made. Such projects often generate a need for school facilities,however, before increased valuations are placed on the tax rolls.

Both urban renewal and expressway development are primarilyinstigated by the Federal Government through monetary incentivesand, if coordinated, may be effective means of rejuvenating the Na-tion'ef central cities. Urban renewal legislation in a modified formstarted as early as 1937 with interest, in public housing and slumclearance. Expressway devellipment in cities began on a largescale as part of the Federal Highway Act of 1956. Both have beeninfluential forces in the redevelopment and improvement of the Na-tion's metropolitan central city areas.

City expressways are the skeleton of a city and the frameworkaround which the city lives and grows. Intelligently located express-ways can invigorate the economic, social, and cultural life of a city,can be coordinated with slum clearance, can aid in solving trafficproblems, and can save residential areas by screening. them fromcommercial or industrial areas. Conversely, poorly located onesmay become a "Chinese wall," dividing neighborhoods and disrupt-ing established patterns.

There is a far-reaching good that can come from federally financedurban renewal and highway projects. In such projects, a compre-hensive plan of the community should be drawn up which includesplans for urban renewal projects, schools, recreation, public facili-ties, utilities, and urban transportation systems The residentialland-use plan should show densities of residential development, theprice of specific types of houses and apartments, and the areas inwhich they are to be developed. William H. Claire says that a com-prehensive housing plan is important to urban renewal and urbantransport at ion because--

URBAN SCHOOL FACTLME8 13

A plan for relocation of site occupants displaced by urban renewal andother governmental action can be more intelligently formulated andmore effectively carried out.Selection of the type of residential land reuse in an urban renewalarea can he more accurately made In relation to adjacent areas.Builders taking advantage of FHA mortgage Insurance can do so withassurance of a sound investment.Size and spacing of arterial highway routes can be planned forpredetermined traffic load.Rapid mass-transit routes can be planned and installed to serve resi-dential areas of known densities.Populatiott densities can Is' planned to help justify the coat of rapidMass transit."'

In the past, the metropolitan central city dominated the surround-ing area or region. In several instances it still does, but the trendis for the outlying areas to become more influential. Therefore,ninny forces are needed to blend the city and its outlying areas to-gether since they are. interdependent. It would seem that if theproblems of metropolitan areas are to be effectively solved, a phi-losophy of government must persist that allows complete and objec-tive overall planning.

METROPOLITAN PLANNING

In most metropolitan areas, no regional governmental structureexists to undertake areawide planning. If effective metropolitanplanning,is to take place, there must be close cooperation and co-ordination among local, State, and Federal governmental levels.William L. Slayton," Commissioner of the Urban Renewal Agency,indicates that incentives for activities such as urban renewal mightwell come under three basic categories:

State enabling legislationState financial and technical aidGranting of authority for a municipality to undertake urban renewalprojects.

Robert Y. Adams" points out that a community is affected byfragmented local governments, whose responsibility covers suchthings as water supply, traffic, transportation, waste disposal,schools, and so forth. Ile indicates that these problems cannot be

" William H. Claire. "Urban Renewal and Transportation," Traffic Quarterly, July 1959,pp. 414-422.

1) William L. Slayton. "Colleges, Universities, and Urban Renewal," Higher Education.Washington : U.S. Government Printing Mace, March 1962.

" Sob4lit Y. Adams. "Urban Area Problems and Industrial Expansion," Proceedings ofthe Governor'. Conference on Urban Area Problems, Mar. 25-27,1958. Bloomington, Ind. :Indiana Univerdty. (Mimeographed report.)


solved unless the responsibility for solving them is clearly and con-cisely established in an individual, a council, or a commission hav-ing the authority to act and being directly responsible to voters.

At, an Indiana Governor's conference on vrban area problems, thefollowing topics were considered:. (1) the core problems, (2) theproblems of the established city, (3) the problems of the growthareas, and (4) problems of the suburban and urban areas. Theproblems of the established city and of the growth area are of ex-treme importance because they indicate observable trends. Theyare listed below.

(a) Problems of the established cityDeterioration of neighborhoods (lack of conservation procedures)Obsolete facilities parks, schools, business areasTraffiecongestion and poor circulationFltxxl control and drainageFinanceboss of leadership citizens, governmental, and political

(b) Problems of the growth areaInadequate planningDifficulty of comprehensive planningDensity standardstninimum and maximumLand useIndustrial, shoppingAnnexation policykeyed to cervices and developmentFinancing servicesprivate and publicSchool and recreation area-site problemsTraffic circulation and expresswaysSanitationWater supplyDrainage "

'a Ibid., pp. 88-84.

Section III

SCHOOL-FACILITIES PLANNING PROBLEMS

URBAN RENEWAL PROJECTS

"I'rban renewal" is the term used to describe the diversified effortsof localities, often carried out with the financial assistance of theFederal Government, to eliminate and prevent slums and blight.The Federal Government's first comprehensive effort to provide as-sistance for the clearance and redevelopment of slums was author-ized by the housing Act, of 1949. Title I of the act set up funds forloans and grants to local redevelopment, authorities for programs ofslum clearance and redevelopment. M. Carter MOsarland indicatedthat this particular piece of legislation rested on two basic assump-tions:

The private redevelopment of slum land is impossible on a large scalewithout the assembly, by use of the public powers of eminent domain, oflarge enough tracts to perMit proper planning and an economical scaleof redevelopment operations.

The cost of slum acquisition and demolition will exceed the price atwhich slum land must be sold to make redevelopment possible. The costof assembling, clearing, and "writing down" slum land on the scaleneeded is so great that Federal financial support in the form of loans andgrants is necessary.'

It was found, during the period 1949-54, that clearing residentialslums was but one aspect of urban rejuveation. The Housing Actof 1954, therefore, was expanded to authorize Federal financial as-sistance for the renewal of blighted areas that are not deterioratedto a degree warranting total clearance. Today, federally assistedprojects may involve

Acquiring and clearing a glum or blighted areaeither residential ornonresidentialand disposing of the land for redevelopment in accord-ance with planned uses

M. Carter McFarland. The Challenge of Urban Renewal. Technical Bulletin 84.Washington : Urban Land Institute, 1958, p. 7.

15


gi Rehabilitation and conservation of structures in such an area ay prop-erty owners, accompanied by improvement of community facilities bythe local governmentAny combination of the above.

In addition to these project activities, some localities undertaketheir own citywide programs aimed at preventing urban blight.

Urban renewal is a local program locally conceived, planned, andexecuted. It is a concerted effort by a locality, using public andprivate resources, to correct and/or prevent urban blight and decayand to set in motion long-range planned development.

Renewal projects are planned and executed by a local publicagency which may be a separate public agency, a local housingauthority, or a department of a city government. Federal assist-ance is available when local resources alone are not sufficient. Toqualify for Federal assistance for an urban project, a locality mustadopt and have properly certified a "workable program for com-munity improvement." This is the community's survey of its totalproblem and a plan for effective action. The community commitsitself to the attainment within a reasonable time of the followingseven objectives :

Adequate local codes and ordinances, effectively enforcedA comprehensive plan for development of the communityAnalysis of blighted neighborhoods to determine treatment neededAdequate administrative organizations to carry out urban renewalprogramsAbility to meet financial requirementsResponsibility for adequately rehousing families displaced by urban re-newal and other governmental activitiesCitizen participation

The Urban 11 enewal Administration, one of the constituents of theHousing and Home Finance Agency, supervises the program ofFederal assistance to localities. The chief points of contact betweenthe Urban Renewal Administration and cities wishing to participatein the program are the seven regional offices of the Housing andHome Finance Agency. (See p. 63.)

Urban Renewal and the Schools

In metropolitan centers slums and other blighted areas, over-crowding and sudden or drastic shifts in population often directlyaffect planning of school facilities. By the same token, the re-moval of blighted areas or other unsatisfactory conditions and the

URBAN SCHOOL FACILITIES! 17

relief of overcrowding through urban renewal projects also affectschool planning in a variety of ways.

Specific problem areas of concern reported by the school officialsare those involving (1) school costs and financing, (2) immediateand long-range building and educational program planning, (3) ef-fects of population shifts, (4) school-site utilization and selection,(5) zoning, atilt (6) authority and control.

School Coate and Financing

While urban renewal is often thought, of as a program to removeslums and other blighted areas, it may well also be a conditionto economic survival of the city. As blight spreads, middle- andhigher-income families avoid it by moving to the suburbs. Industryand commerce follow the flight, and a downward spiral of the econ-omy results, with an attendant reduction of tax collections in thecentral area. A business located in a blight area will tend to adaptitself to that environment or move elsewhere. Good residentialrental units are equally affected by neighborhood deterioration.The consequent need for city services to combat crime, fire, dis-ease, and juvenile delinquency increases as the blight spreads. Yetthe financial ability to meet these increased demands mayhe curtailed by the' very cause that creates them. By definitionthen, the formalized urban renewal programs are designed to elimi-nate central city blight and obsolescence which are primarily resi-dential, to develop proper and economic used of land, to increasetax revenues, to reduce the cost of city services, to establish goodneighborhoods and adequate housing, and to arrest the flight ofhousing and business to the suburbs.'

The effects of the demands for extra city services before and(hiring the renewal development on school-facilities planning areoften compounded. The removal of property from the tax rollsuntil the completion and assessment of a renewal area may affectthe financing of the school-building construction which the projectitself has made necessary, particularly where the bonded indebted-ness statutes are in effect. A problem, as indicated by one:thirdof the school officials, was that, even though the removal of thetaxable property was temporary, the consequent lowering of thecity's financial ability curtailed school construction at the time whenit was most needed.

Ibid.

717-913 0-64--4


The time lag between the initial planning stages of a school build-ing program and its completion date may be as great as 3 years. Aserious problem in this particular area, as indicated by nearly one-half of the school planners, is the necessity to replace school build-ings and sites which are no longer needed in renewal areas but areneeded in areas into which displaced families have moved. Factorsinvolved are the lack of availability of adequate sites and lack ofready funds to purchase new sites and/or construct new buildings.In theory at least, these problems would have been anticipated andresolutions made for them as a part of the initial survey and prOjectrequest. However, in a number of instances, problems in buildingand in planning educational programs arose because of dalays inthe redevelopment schedules.

'While such financial problems have occasionally disrupted ordelayed the school construction program in the redevelopment area.Federal urban renewal legislation provides that the cost of locallyfinanced school buildings which directly serve redeveloped areasmay be treated as part of the locality's share of the cost of theproject. As a general rule, the Federal Government will pay two-thirds of the cost of the overall project., including the allowablecost, of school construction serving the redevelopment area. Sincethese funds are paid to the city sponsoring the project, school plan-ners, particularly those whose school districts are fiscally independ-ent, still must obtain needed funds for school construction throughregular channels and within existing legal limitations.

Problems of Planning

The importance of the schools in the redevelopment of urban areaswas recognized by William L. Slayton, Commissioner of the UrbanRenewal Agency, when he said:

The role of the schools in the auccead of new neighborhoods Is depend-ent upon their ability to attract families who already have a wide rangeof housing choices. Middle and upper income families have in recentyears shown a marked preference for housing In the suburbs. There aremany reasons for this, but one persistent factor is the belief that sub-urbs offer opportunities for better education for their children. It meansthat the central city schools, with a tremendous advantage in fixed plant.with going administrative and teaching staffs, and with all the culturaladvantages of the City, are unable to provide the educational opportunitiesavailable in the suburban areas. For the urban renewal program, thesuccess of both redevelopment and rehabilitation appears to be intimately


related to the availability of superior educational programs attuned to thecultural pattern of the new neighborhoods that are being created.'

It is probably this recognition of the values of the educationalprogram that leads to the success of the urban renewal projectsgenerally. Slayton further stressed the importance of the educa-tional program to the success of the redevelopment projects whenhe said :

The attraction of renewal areas cannot be effective without a highlyregarded school program. . . . The failure to provide good new schoolson a timely basis In many other renewal areas is no less instructive inits impact. . . . As Dr. Conant has pointed out. the movement of themiddle class to the suburb has resulted in cultural and intellectual seg-regation in society and in the school systems. This pattern will not bedisturbed without an effort to provide equally acceptable alternativeswithin the city. The essential step is recognition of the special problemsof schools in redevelopment areas where important changes in the popu-lation are taking place. The schools in these areas must be organizedand equipped to carry out their mission in a radically changed environ-ment. The objective Is to aline the school program to support the effortsto redevelop slum areas. Only in this way can the central city surviveas a balanced community.'

In terms of cooperative planning between urban renewal officialsand school-facilities officials, a vast majority of the latter indicatedthat there were few problems. In several instances, school officialsserved either as regular or advisory members of city planning corn-missiens. They were thus able to keep informed on the planningneeds and proposals. One area of serious concern reported bythe school officials, however, was that of unpredictable demajfor school facilities arising from uncertainty about the time of com-pletion of redevelopment projects. Because of complexities of re-newal and the resulting inability of the renewal planners and develop-ers to adhere to projected time schedules and completion dates, schoolofficials were occasionally hard pressed to provide adequate schoolplant facilities when and as needed. In several instances, moderniza-tion or rehabilitation of school buildings had to be delayed, pending

_

completion of the renewal project and in anticipation of the influx offamilies to that area. In other cases, additional classrooms were pito-vided, but remained idle for periods of time because of delays inscheduling of the redevelopment projects.

William L 611a7ton. 'The Influence of Urban Renewal on Education," 8cMool Mk.Washington: U.fr. Oevernment Printing Office, June 1962.

Ibid., p. 11.


Problems of Population Shifts

Two-thirds of the school officials reported that shifts of popula-tion attributable to urban renewal projects in the cities caused prob-lems in planning programs and facilities. A difficulty stemmedfrom the fact that the officials were not always able to anticipatethe areas into which the displaced persons would move. The resultwas a disproportionate distribution of pupils in the various buildingsaffected. Some buildings were seriously overcrowded while othershad vacant rooms. This then necessitated changes in school attend-ance centers and the consequent disruption of the neighborhoodschools. Another result reported in several instances where it waseither impossible or impractical to make these changes was thatthe school had to adopt a program of double sessions in the build-ings available, until other arrangements could be made.

Another facet of the same problem concerned the school attend-ance areas in which the displaced persons relocated. In a numberof situations it was reported to be necessary to expand existingfacilities on extremely limited sites to accommodate those whovacated the renewal project areas. In others it was necessary toadjust pupil attendance areas or districts to fully utilize the build-ings available. The psychological aspects of these changes on manyof the patrons and pupils involved were quite serious.

In the cases where renewal projects were large enough or occupieda sufficiently large area to warrant locating a school within the re-development areas, it has been possible to acquire sites at the rawland value. This has been helpful to the districts concerned.

School-Site Problems

Problems involving school sites that were affected by urban re-newal projects were reported by one-half of the school officials con-tacted. Obtaining land for school sites in already congested areasis not only expensive but it usually involves court procedures andserious delays. In several instances, the school officials stated thatrenewal projects had been planned in areas adjoining or close tobut not actually encompassing existing school sites. The conse-quent problems of providing school facilities to accommodate antici-pated increases in enrollments after the completion of renewalprojects were serious.


Credit: Chicago Public Schools

The unusual architectural design of this new elementary school in Chicago was in largepart a response to the problem of building a school that would accommodate nearly1,000 pupils on a site of less than 1 acre. Inside. the classrooms are wedged-shapedand without fixed doors. Each floor has its own centstpmmons area

Zoning Problems

Approximately one-third of the respondents indicated that zoningregulations had caused problems in school-facilities planning. Theseproblems were primarily due to the inconsistency of the zoning reg-ulationi4 which permit potential degeneration of certain areas ofthe city. In other words, regulations pertaining to land-use multi-dwelling units were such that in these instances there were eitherfew restrictions or the restrictions were not enforced. As a result,the crowded school facilities already existing in those areas werein most instances beset by additional enrollments.

Authority and Control

There were relatively few problems resulting from the matterof which agencythe school planners or those responsible for therenewal projectshad authority and jurisdiction over the redevelop-ment planning. The rules and regulations by which the urban re-newal projects are set< up are specific and clear cut. They seem


to be quite well understood by the various agencies concerned. Itwas evident that the school officials were eager to have these im-provements and to work with the planners responsible far them.Their main concern was that the planning be corrIplete andcooperative.

EXPRESSWAY DEVELOPMENT

The planning, location, building, sad operation of highways in theUnited States is and always has been primarily a State and localaffair. For the most part, early roads followed trails that origi-nated in frontier history. The courses of most main highways andcentral city streets were fixed before the advent of the motorvehicle. As traffic steadily mounted after World War I, many ofthem were improved by surfacing, widening, and minor relocation.Many main urban streets were forced to carry through traffic aswell as local traffic. In the built-up urban areas residential, com-mercial, industrial, educational, and recreational planning were alldone in relation to the existing street pattern.

Federal aid to the States for highways began modestly in 1916,and has grown steadily ever since. Some 880,000 of the 3.6 millionmiles of roads and streets in the United States are now included inthe Federal-aid primary and secondary systems. Of this amount,41,000 miles are in urban areas. These are all eligible for improve-ment, with Federal aid, if the State shares the cost of improvementequally with the Federal Government. Beginning in 1956 the Fed-eral Government has undertaken, with the States, an acceleratedprogram to complete the Interstate Highway System, a 41,000-milenetwork of urban and rural freeways for which the Federal Govern-ment is paying 90 percent of the cost. In these cooperative Federal-State programs, the States choose the systems of routes for Improve-ment, plan the projects to be built each year, and award andsupervise the construction contracts, all subject to review andapproval of the U.S. Bureau of Public Roads.°

Necessarily, some four-fifths of the Interstate System is being builton new locations. In urban areas, existing city streets are often t,,onarrow and too built up to accommodate modern freeway construc-tion. Often, new rights-of-way must be found, wide enough for theneeded traffic lanes and for interchanges and sometimes frontageroads as well. Highway planners endeavor to disrupt the city as

America's lAfetimm. Federal Aid for Hiphamos, D.e. Departmcot of Cot:metre. Bureauof Public Roods. Wauldnirtoo : D.B. Oovernosent Printing OflIce, 1962.


little as possible, but there is rarely a satisfactory solution that issimple and inexpensive. The problems of freeways have led mostStates to facilitiate the acquisition of land and of access controlthrough law or constitutional provisions.

The impact of highway planning on urban areas is far reaching.The following facts help to put the urban transportation problem inperspective: Of the total travel of all passengers in 1960, roughly 390billion passenger-miles were intracity. Of this total, 90 percent wasby automobile, 8 percent by transit, and 2 percent by commutertrains. In terms of passenger-miles, this breaks down to 350 billionfor automobiles, 31.2 billion for transit, and 7.8 billion for commutertrains. If transit riding does not decline further and if the ratio ofuse among these three modes of travel remains the same, then in1980 the passenger-mile figures in urban areas will be 70'2 billion byautomobile, 62.4 billion by transit, and 15.6 billion by commutert rains.°

To encourage an interstate highway system, the Federal Govern-ment and the separate States agreed in 1947 on the location of suchroads, funds were appropriated on a 50-50-matching basis, but lessthan 1 percent, of the proposed system was built. Because of in-creasing numbers of automobile registrations and the resultant. pres-sures of highway use, plans were made and approved by the Con-gress in 1956 for the building of 41,000 miles of interstate highwayfor which the Federal Government would pay nine-tenths of the cost.While the Federal aid program is a cooperative one, the Stateschoose the systems of routes for development, select and plan theindividual projects to be built each year, and award and supervisethe construction contracts. A somewhat disruptive feature of thisprogram is that most of these prospective roads will be new. Sev-enty-two percent of the mileage, both in urban and rural areas, willbe in completely new locations.' Land is needed for 41,000 milesof proposed roadway having rights-of-way as wide as 300 feet. Conil-

plex interchanges, ramps, and frontage roads alone will require ad-ditional quantities of land. Some of these highways will traverselands that former highways circumvented because of the expenseand engineering difficulties. This, in turn, has created land ac-quisition problems that cannot be bypassed.° Emphasis on this pro--gram has caused the State legislatures to facilitate the acquisitionof land through controlled-access laws or constitutional provisions.

Ibid.'Ibid.Land Actuirition and lImmomic Impact Stadia itait. Washington : Highway Research

Hoard. 10511

717-018 0-04-8


Rex M. Whitton, Federal Highway Administrator for the Bureauof Public Roads, U.S. Department of Commerce, has said:

It has also been estimated that by 1980 about 16,000 miles of free-ways will be required to serve adequately the urban traffic within thecontinually expanding urban areas. These same experts estimate thatas of 1980 the expansion of our urban area will be of such proportionsthat about 9,600 miles of the Interstate System will be urban. Thereare now about 800 miles of existing urban freeways other than thoseon the Interstate System. If the estimates of the experts are correct.and certainly in the light of present knowledge they appear reasonable,this means that we will need in addition to the existing freeways andthose that are to be constructed under the Interstate program, some5,600 miles of further urban freeway development by 1980.'

These, improved facilities are therefore essential in the urbanareas, and they will necessitate cooperative planning by all agen-cies affected by the changes to be made. As a matter of fact,the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1962 will have a definite impact

Remarks at the Conference on the Impact of Urbanization on Netroatiost. Q.R. Oak* ofEducation, Washington, D.C., May 28, 1962.

&WO: U.B. Do !whims* of Oootowroo, Dims of Public Roos.This view of a section of Roston has now passed Into history; In its place stands the

John R. Ms:maid Highway, a major intracity exprownvay, shown on the right.


on urban planning. In addition to providing increasing Federalaid and assistance, the act requires that the 11/2-percent funds bewholly used for planning and research. Prior to this act, Federallegislation since 1934 allowed 11/2 percent of the funds apportionedto be used for planning and research purposes. After July 1,

1965, no program for Federal Aid Highway projects in any urbanarea of more than 50,000 population will be approved by the Secre-tary of Commerce unless such projects are based'on a continuing,comprehensive, transportation-planning process carried on coop-eratively by States and local communities.

The school officials interviewed readily recognized the value andimportance of expressway systems to the cities generally and totheir own school districts as well. They were also well aware ofthe facets involved in planning expressways in and through thecities and of the neeffor additional land to expand existing road-ways or to establish new routes and interchanges for the express-ways. There were, however, problem areas identified in

Credit: U.S. Department Of Commerce, Bureau of Public Roads

The razing of houses. the relocation of people. and the changing land values thataccompany the building of an urban expressway all affect school-facilities planning.


connection with this which affect school-facilities planning. Amongthem were problems of (1) costs and financing, (2) planning,anerf3) authority and control.

Costs and Financing

Nearly one-half of the school officials interviewed indicated thattheir boards of education were inconvenienced by delays in pay-ment for school-owned land which was taken for expressway devel-opment. Many of the delays were caused by local or regionalpolitical, economic, or public-pressure forces. The delays insettling claims made the budgeting of capital outlays for the schooldistrict uncertain, particularly where it was necessary to replaceor expand the existing site and program immediately.

Eighty-seven percent of the respondents said that the loss ofrevenue incurred by the removal of property from the tax rollsfor expressway development was a problem. This, too, affectedthe amounts of money available to the school district, a particularhardship in districts where it was necessary to replace immedi-ately the facilities affected by condemnation proceedings. Inmost instances, the loss was reported as only temporary or as last-ing only until the new routes had been established and- the landsadjacent to the highways developed or redeveloped, assessed, andplaced on the tax rolls.

Studies by highway authorities show that the latter situation isrelatively common. Many of the displaced individuals and busi-nesses move to other locations in the city and improve their prop-erty. Land use adjacent to expressways frequently changes, andthe land usually rises in value. While the net financial effect afterthe completion of the expressway development is beneficial, manyof the school-facilities needs occur during the interim.

Another problem of cost and financing is the replacement ofschool sites and buildings which have been taken for highway use.Replacement costs of appropriate school sites are extremely high,and usually involve the delays, costs, and other inconveniences ofcondemnation proceedings. This obviously is not a unique problemof school planning officials. It is equally true for highway, urbanrenewal, and other public building programs. A major difference,however, is that the costs and financing of the school facilities haveto be done primarily on a local basis. It also suggests that com-plete communication, cooperation, and understanding among thevarious agencies are essential for the best interests of all.


On the positive side of this particular situation, the forces of landacquisition for highway development have given several school dis-tricts the necessary impetus to abandon some of their old and ob-solete school buildings.

Planning

There were a number of problems concerned with both immediateand long-range planning of school facilities. In order to providesuitable facilities most. efficiently, programs of maintenance, opera-tion, rehabilitation, remodeling, and new construction must beplanned well ahead of actual needs. As indicated in a previous sec-tion, the timelag between the initial planning stages of a school-building construction program and its completion date may be asgreat as 3 years. Therefore, it is essential that plans for proposedhighway routes be made known as soon as possible. Approximatelyone-half of the school officials indicated thatthey had encountereddifficulties in their planning because they were not sufficiently in-formed on expressway development in their districts.

Other types of school - facilities planning problems arising from ex-pressway development projects, as indicated by the school officials,were those pertaining to pupil-traffic and transportation patterns,cooperative planning with city and State expressway officials, andpsychological aspects of dividing established school service, or at-tendance, districts.

School attendance areas or districts are determined on the basis ofa combination of factors: the numbers of pupils to be served, thetypes of neighborhoods, and natural or manmade features such aswatercourses, topography, highway, bridges, and railroad rights-of-way. Insofar as possible, efforts are made to avoid hazardouspupil traffic patterns to and from school. Once the districts areestablished, educational programs, buildings, and faculty and staffneeds are then planned, and become a vital part of the coordinatedcitywide school plan. Neighborhoods are often identified by theirschool attendance districts, and their loyalties are established through

Llocal parent-teacher associations and other school-related activities.While highway planners generally try to locate urban freeways

along natural or existing dividing lines, they have often bisectedninny school district attendance centers. Sixty percent of the schoolofficials indicated that they had encountered school-facilities plan-ning problems as a result of this development. The problems wereusually based on the single attendance district rather than the entirecity school district.

URBAN SCHOOL FACILITIES 29The cooperative, comprehensive, planning processes that are

already completed, underway, or proposed in most of the largecities should eventually tend to rectify many of these problems.When all affected elements of State, city, and county governmentswork together in a comprehensive study of land use, population,economic and social factors, and school, highway, and housingdevelopments, then long-range plans can be more readilycoordinated.


Because the planners of schools and the planners of expresswaysboth function in the public interest and have rights of eminent do-main, questions of authority and control often arise between thetwo groups. Recognizing the emphasis placed on the interstatesystem of highways by the 1956 Federal-Aid Highway Act, theStates now have controlled access laws or constitutional provisionsrelating to interstate highways. The general rule is that publicproperty may pot be condemned for other public use unless thelegislature has authorized, either expressly or '1)-y necessary impli-cation, the acquisition of such property. With this superior author-ity to acquire land for rights-of-way, local questions still ariseamong the various planning groups. The consensus of the schoolofficials was that they recognize the values of and necessity forexpressway development in their cities and, in fact, encouragesuch development. They felt that, with coordination and coopera-tive planning among the various agencies, they themselves can bemore specific in their school planning.

ZONING REGULATIONS AND HOUSING CODES

Land-use patterns in metropolitan central cities are fluid, andchange constantly. The whole urban complex undergoes periodicchanges in size and shape. New neighborhoods evolve, the use ofbuildings changes, and ninny are torn down to make the samespace available for other purposes. In one particular city a fac-tory building is being completely remodeled and rehabilitated, andwill serve as one of the neighborhood schools in the district. In:mother city an obsolete school building has been sold, and is beingconverted into an assembly plant and warehouse. These changesicur also in residential areas, where the old mansion-type single-family dwellings have been converted into apartments or rooming-


houses, studios, or small offices. Economic and social values andqualities of the neighborhoods soon reflect these changes for betteror for worse. Unless there is some sort of governmental control,land-use distributions in these areas would developlas economic andsocial forces impelled them. Individual selfish interests wouldignore and conflict with the goals of the general community andpublic interest. To forestall this type of activity then, local orcounty-wide controls in the form of zoning regulations, subdivisioncontrols, master planning, and official mapping are necessary.'°

The existence of such controls does not necessarily assure that acommunity can or will attain the goals it might set for its overalldevelopment. Since conditions and needs change with time, theland-use controls cannot be made indiscriminately or for merepolitical expediencies. In discussing this particular problem area,two of the school officials said that their cities had quite detailed reg-ulations concerning the numbers of family units per residence. Thedifficulty was that the official city building departments were notprovided with sufficient staffs to see that the zoning and housinm,regulations were adhered to. Consequently, some neighborhooWwere extremely crowded, and this crowding placed a heavy burdenon the available school facilities there.

All of the school officials interviewed recognized the need and valueof zoning and housing ordinances and the importance of such con-trols in planning school facilities. As a matter of fact, many ofthem depend upon these regulations in projecting and predictingtheir classroom needs. -

The adoption and administration of zoning and other land-use con-trols within most metropolitan areas are divided among a multi-plicity of local governmental units. Each of these autonomous plan-ning authorities usually is concerned with the zoning problems inits own jurisdiction."

The problems in this regard seem to arise in the interpretation andenforcement of the regulations. In several instances, the boundariesof the school system encompass more than one civil district. Zoningregulations in one area of the school system are often in conflictwith those in another area.

The efficiency and effectiveness of many school buildings dependupon the type of neighborhood or community in which they arelocated. The type of neighborhood in turn depends to a great extent

oebarles Ball. "Milwaukee Land Use and Zoning," Trudge Quarterly, October 1959.pp. 681 -582.

"Itdd.


upon the zoning regulations, which determine whether it is strictlya residential area or a combination of residential, commercial, andindustrial areas. The type of neighborhood depends also on theextent to which limits are placed on the population density throughcontrols on the height, bulk, and occupancy of buildings.

Planning

While this particular problem area of school-facilities planning didnot seem to be proportionately as great as some others, it presenteddifficulties ranging from minor to serious. Approximately one-thirdof the school officials responding reported that they 10 had somedifficulty in obtaining the cooperation of the city planners whendrawing up master zoning plans. In a few instances, there werereports of problems caused by political pressures or expediencies in-ichanging or permitting some zoning regulations.

Approximately one-half of the school official who reported saidthat they had some problems in planning school facilities in areaswhere garden type apartment buildingsor other kinds of concentratedresidential buildings were permitted. Usually, the difficulty seemedto arise when there was a sudden influx of families into an estab-lished neighborhood. In many instances, the school facilities werealready operating at their maximum capacities before the influxof new children. It, was also indicated that school-facilities plan-ning was made more difficultby the inconsistencies in regulationsconcerning numbers of family units per dwelling. Whereas onesection of the city may be peimitted to have high-rise apartmentbuildings or multifamily houses, another may be permitted onlysingle- family units.

Under such circumstances, school buildings in one area mightIs seriously overcrowded, while the buildings in another areamight have empty and unused classrooms. This resulted in double,and, in a few cases, triple shifts in the schoolday in districts whereconcentrations of families existed. In order to offset the effects of,tich concentration, the school planners were forced to change theschool attendance boundaries, to add to old buildings or buildentirely new ones in congested areas, or to transport children fromone attendance district to another.

It was stressed by the school officials that cooperative planningbetween city planning boards and school officials was essential ifmany of the school-facilities planning problems were to be avoidedor minimized. In the cases reported where this was done, fewe'problems existed.


BUILDING CODES

The formulation of building regulations is another of the responsi-bilities delegated to the local government. Basically, the intent ofregulation of construction is-to provide for public health and safety.Certain safeguards then are written into building codes ;which willassure strong construction, adequate light and ventilation, andreasonable freedom from fire hazards. The building code, like thezoning regulations, is a law or ordinance pawed by the local govern-ment which establishes minimum requirements for securing struc-tural, sanitary, and fire safety. Properly planned and enforced, itpermits the use of any materials or methods of construction thatcan be proven to meet the performance requirements of the code.

Building codes are much more detailed than zoning regulationssince they are concerned with matters of actual building construc-tion. Technical competence is essential, therefore, to develop ade-quate codes. Until very recently the most popular way of draftingbuilding codes was by voluntary committees of local professionaltalent. One community patterned its requirements after those ofanother, but added the variations its own advisers thought desir-able for local situations. The codes became a compilation of indi-vidual opinions on good construction rather than on sound safetyregulations. Intentionally or otherwise, the codes often reflectedthe personal prejudices of their authors and pressures from localinterests. This then resulted in building specifications requiring farmore costly construction than necessary for safety.

Several attempts have been made to standardize building coderequirements for various segments of the building industry throughresearch and development. Very little of this research has beenincorporated into local codes because of the local voluntary pro-cedures and the lime-consuming task involved in the review of allthese data.

More recently. codes have .been developed to indicate the perform-ance requirements for various elements of buildings and structuresin `relation to the hazards faced or conditions met. As a result, oneor two regional codes and three national codes have been developed.and are quite well recognized. Among the latter are the NationalBuilding ('ode, drawn up by the National Board of Fire Under-writers, and the Basic Building Code, drawn up by the BuildingOfficials' Conference of America." These codes contain minimum

is Alfred 11. Schroeder. "What the Building Code Means to the Public." MinaMunicipalities, February 1961. pp. 50-52.


requirements, provide for acceptance of materials and methods basedon satisfactory performance standards, and recognized accepted in-dustry standards. Further, as conditions and materials change, newtests are made and changes are incorporated into the codes.

There would be, of course, certain advantages in the adoption ofthese recognized codes by the localities. In addition to giving as-surance that these codes are kept up to date through careful testingof new construction methods and materials, adoption of these codeswould enhance the acceptance of new ideas and would provide forstandardization of requirements.

There are a variety of school-facilities planning problems createdby building codes. While the school officials recognized that buildingcodes are highly desirable and that many of them are essential, theypointed out that some requirements and circumstances work againstthe safety and well-being of the occupants. Among them are theinconsistencies in and various interpretations of code requirements,excessive requirements, outdated codes, multiplicity of agencies en-

, forcing codes, and pressures of political or vested interest groups,who may cause codes to be established or revised indiscriminately orto their own advantage.

P1cmaiaq

Approximately two-thirds of the respondents reported that theywere continually beset with interpretations of building codes asapplied to (1) new construction, (2) older buildings, and (3) tempo-rary portable buildings. While adherence to code requirements innew construction is somewhat simpler, it is often difficult in olderbuildings and in portable structures. Strevell and Burke state :

Although school- building codes, regulations, or standards promulgatedby the State educational agency are easier to change than statutes, thisdoes not prevent them from imposing upon localities standards that havenot been conclusively demonstrated by research and experimentation.that have become outdated, or that prevent desirable changes in educa-tional policies, programs. methods, and practices."


In terms of authority, control, and which agency or agencies havejurisdiction, one-half or more of the school officials reported con-flicts in the interpretation and methods of enforcing code require-

W. H. Btrevell and A. J. Rorke. Releoet Boildiwg Progreaw--Adoilisistration of theSchool Building Program. New York : McGraw-Hill. 1960, p. 111.


ments. There seemed to be a definite question on the degree towhich the school system, as an agency of the State, is subject to thecodes of such local agencies as the fire departments, boards ofhealth, and water and sewage commissions. Finohum ?.d Boer-rigter report that the State codes are patterned after applicablenational or regional codes; they are usually less restrictive thanlocal or municipal codes, and are often intended to set minimum,not maximum, standards.'

Where there were conflicts reported, a majority of the schoolofficials indicated that. they followed the more stringent, code, whichin most cases was the local code. They agreed that provisions forthe protection of health, safety, and personld comfort should bemaintained, but that specific construction details, methods, andmaterials insisted on by the code often limited the future use of thebuilding. Because school buildings are a specialized type of struc-ture and because the continued efficient utilization of them is de-pendent upon the ease with which they can be adapted to changingphilosophies and programs, special code requirements should beprovided for them.

CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND FINANCING

Every step in planning school facilities is dependent upon the,availability of funds, and the availability of funds is in turn depend-ent. upon many factors. While this is true everywhere, there area number of specific problems peculiar to the metropolitan center.During the period of transition from agriculture to industry and ofthe movement of people from rural areas to cities, a hint of theproblems began to appear. The demand for land and the conse-quent spiraling of land values, the co*gestion of traffic, the inade-quacy of public utilities and other city services, overcrowded hous-ing, and the spread of slums all combined to, create serious demandsfor such services as police and fire protection, better means oftransportation, and good schools.

Discussing some of the reasons for the financial plight of bigcities, Fred F. Beach said that the financial status of cities haschanged markedly since World War II. Growth of the suburbs,shifts in taxable wealth, and population migration are three of thefactors that have put cities ;nto a less favorable position in theStates than they formerly were. High construction costs, brought

" L N. Pinellas and Glenn C. Boerrigter. Rohool IMNe. Preventios, °patrol. Protec-t/ow. Witabington : U.B. Government Printing OfIlee. 1962, pp. 82-113.

URBAN SCHOOL FACILITIES 35about by the increasing costs of labor and materials, and lowertaxable valuation per pupil, together with constitutional and statu-tory provisions limiting taking authority, create real dilemmas.Large cities are the cores of great economic centers which theycannot adequately tax."

The increased pressure for funds from the many governmentaloperations in the cities and the statutory limitations controllingthe funds have, as reported by a number of the respondents, seri-ously curtailed the maintenance of adequate school facilities.Among the problems in this category reported by the school officialswere (1) construction costs, (2) financing, (3) planning, and (4)design. Each is described more fully on the following pages.

Construction Costs

Under the item of costs, nearly every respondent indicated thatlabor and materials costs were of serious consequence. The effectsof these high costs very often limit the building design and result infacilities which do not meet, school needs efficiently and economically.

A second major problem of building costs reported was that ofestablishing valid cost copiparisons, both locally and regionally.Variances such as the size of the projects, site conditions, climaticconditions, availability of materials and labor, and the quality andscope of the facilities being plannedeven the choice of the costunitall have their effects on how boards of education and the gen-eral public react to needed expenditures for school construction. Avery real but less tangible problem reported was that of relatin.g con-struction costs to educational efficiency. While plans for schoolbuildings with spaces for large foyers, wide corridors, attics, unusedbasement areas, high-ceilinged classrooms, gymnasiums, and audi-toriums may suggest a favorable overall cost per square foot or cubicfoot, the cost for the strictly instructional space may be very high.On the other hand, plans for an efficiently designed building thatplaces emphasis on strictly instructional space and that affords themaximum possible utilization of classroom space may suggest ahigher cost per cubic foot. Much of the misunderstanding in school-facilities planning centers around the different possible proportionswithin a building of usable space to total area.

"Fred F. Beach. "State AidNew Hope for City Schools.," School Life. Washington :H.S. dovvrnmentrrlating Mew, May 1902.


Closely associated with the problem of relating construction coststo educational efficiency and equally serious are the following prob-lems reported by school officials:

Methods of computing capacities and utilization of school buildingsMethods of computing community utilization of school buildingsMethods of computing instructional space .

Methods of estimating pupil unit ratios.

In view of these various aspects, a majority of the school officialsindicated a desire for standardization to avoid conflicting reportingpolicies. Cost units are difficult, if not impossible, to compare un-less compensations are made for cost trends, regional differentials,types of educational programs planned; and the types of buildingsand materials used. Construction-cost indexes have been developedby industrial commissioners of some States and by several privatefirms. Before using these, however, one must be cognizant of thevariables referred to.

One-third of the respondents reported at least minor difficultiesin the areas of contractors' bidding procedures and inconsistenciesof contractual patterns. The other two-thirds indicated that theydid not consider these as problem areas since there were statutoryprovisions which controlled or regulated the procedures. Inasmuchas these regulations were set, they were accepted and complied with.

One final aspect of truction costs that was reported was thestringent and/or ex te building-code requirements and theireffects on school buil ng design and costs. Nearly two-thirdsof the school officials responding indicated that this was a problemarea in school-facilities planning.

Financial Regulations

Problems of financial regulations in planning school facilitieswere far less prevalent. In fact, only one-fourth to one-third ofthe respondents reported this as a problem area, and in mostcasas, the difficulties were considered relatively minor. Methodsof budgeting and accounting for construction costs and proceduresof bidding on school construction bonds created some concern.Prorating the costs of actual construction to costs of preparing thesite for construction, costs for repair of surrounding streets dis-rupted by the building process, and costs for utilities to be htoughtto the building was mentioned as a minor problem. Prorating thebuilding costs into such items as site purchase, actual construction,costs for furniture and equipment, and administrative costs of

L...._.,Credit: Montgomery County Public Schools, Rockville, Md.

Movable partitions (center and rear center) have created flexibility of function for thisclassroom. By following the curve of the windows, one can observe another boldfeature of this building: It's circular.


handling the building program was pointed out by several of theschool officials. Approximately one-third of the respondents indi-cated that they had encountered vested interest, groups that influ-enced building costs.

Planning

With one exception, the problems encountered in the planning ofschool buildings did not seriously affect construction costs andfinancing. In a few instances, the costs for time involved in plan-ning with other governmental and public agencies were reportedas a minor problem. However, increasing enrollments and otherfactors which delay the removal of obsolete school facilities werelisted by a vas* majority of the respondents as a problem area.

Construction and Design

Reporting on building construction and design problems, morethan one-half of the respondents indicated that they encountereddifficulties in designing flexible and adaptable school buildings.In many instances, this was due to site conditions and locations.


Approximately one-half of the school officials participating in thestudy reported difficulties in obtaining high-quality construction ata reasonable cost. There seemed to be a shortage of skilled super-visors and workmen because of the vast amount of public and pri-vate building construction continually in progress. The results ofthis shortage usually show up in a relatively short time after thebuildings have been completed and put into operation.

Problems arising from legal restrictions permitting only conven-tional or traditional designs were practically nonexistent. Asindicated in another section of the study; legal controls pertainmore to materials and methods of construction than to overall de-sign. The officials from one city indicated that their school boardhad adopted a more or less conventional design for all of the elemen-tary-school buildings in the city; minor adaptations were made tofit each particular site but the same basic overall plan was alwaysutilized.

Slightly less than a third of the respondents reported problems con-cerning convertible and demountable school buildings. In a numberof cities, no problems were reported because this type of buildingwas not in use. Where these buildings were used, one problem wasto find a design which was suitable from an educational point of view,but justifiable in toms of costs. Other problems arose from instal-lation and moving costs. Convertible and demountable buildingswere regarded primarily as a means of resolving immediate andemettrency needs.

Slightly less than a third of the school officials reported problemsin developing particular designs for their schools. The roofs ofsome buildings were designed to serve as a play area. In one case,a school was built on stilts so that the area underneath would pro-vide additional playground area. Plans have also been completedfor classrooms in high-rise apartment buildings.

Another problem rworted by more than two-thirds of the schoolofficials as quite a serious one WRA the restriction of building designbecause of site limitations. There is a constantly pressing need formore classroom space on small sites in congested areas. The ex-pense of expanding the site often precludes possibilities for experi-mentation in building design, and it limits, to a certain extot,experimentation in.educational program planning.

More than one-half of the respondents reported difficulties inestablishing 'criteria to determine the value of a building for re-Imie ling and rehabilitation. Several factors were mentioned bythe school officials which had to be constantly borne in mind. In


Credit: Bt. Lola. Board of &location

Ono way of providing a sheltered area for play without sacrificing classroom space is toerect a school building on stilts. This St..I.oulgjdomontary school affords ono exampleof how such a plan can look.

the first place, there are no absolute measurements for determiningthe value of a school building. A building may fail to meet certainaccepted standards, it may have enrollments in excess of capacity,or it may not be properly located in terms of pupil residence.These factors do not necessarily mean that the building should bereplaced. On the other hand, costs for modernization, and remodel-ing and/or rehabilitation may be too high in terms of long-rangeneeds. Even if it were possible to apply objective standards ofevaluation, several instances were mentioned where pressing en-rollment needs gave little opportunity to modernize, remodel, orreplace the buildings.

EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM PLANNING

Changing philosophies of education, new understandings of howchildren learn, and such innovations as team teaching andthe use of educational television, recordings, and other electronicequipment have implications for program efficiency, which dic-tate changes in building design. In addition, plans must provid r

40 PROBLEMS IN PLANNEN'G

the special equipment, space, and staff required in special educa-tion programs for the physically and mentally handicapped, thegifted, slow learners, migrants, and others. Such provisions arebecoming increasingly necessary as population becomes concen-trated in the large metropolitan centers. It was reported that inmany of the schools a large percentage of the pupils enrolled needsuch special services.

e Credit: Montgomery County Public Schools, Rockville, Md.

With teaching machines, each pupil is gbie to master a lesson at his own pace. Formaximum effectiveness, each pupil shgluld have a fairly priVate study space in whichto use the machine.; such spaces.oua be made, as above, by use of pegboard booths.

URBAN SCHOOL FACILME6 41

One of the essential elements for the successful operation of amodern educational program is the building whioh houses that pro-gram. The school building itself is an instrument of education;it is a place where pupils should have opportunities to develop bettermental, social, and physical habits. Therefore, the principle thatthe school plant should be designed to fit the desired program haslong been accepted.

Educational program planning in the metropolitan central citieshas been complicated by a number of different factors: populationgrowth, mass movements from the farms to the cities, new methodsof communication, poor housing, slum areas, expressway develop-ment, and many others. As these problems of educational programplanning arise, they affect school-facilities planning. In this aspectof the study, the following problem areas were identified: (1) plan-ning problems and (2) design problems.

Planning

In terms of problems of planning, one area which seemed to beparamount. in the minds of school officials participating in thestudy was that of visualizing future educational programs and howthey should be accommodated. Buildings being planned and con-structed today will doubtless still be in use for the next 75 to 100years, and one of the problems of planning is to make them adapt-able enough to accommodate future programs efficiently. A secondproblem reported by a majority of the building specialists was thatof creating chligns that represent the most efficient use of buildingspace. A factor having great influence on this type of planningwhich has been mentioned in a previous section (see p. 37) is thatof site limitations on the building design.

A rather minor problem in planning, but one which was men-tioned by one-fourth of the respondents, was that of pressuresexerted by vested-interest groups to include nonessential areas inschool buildings. Examples of this were the inclusion of largeauditoriums or spectator-type gymnasiums when there were similarfacilities available nearby.

To be completely successful, educational program planning musthe done cooperatively with other local agencies. It is quite evidentthat this is being done in a majority of the cities in the study becauseless than a fourth of the school officials reported any problems inthis area. Questions pertaining to the relationships between thelocal public school system and (1) private or parochial schOols and


(2) Federal, State, or other local agencies revealed a similar reac-tion. There were some indications of planning problems between.The central cities and adjoining school districts, particularly whereannexation of territory was involved. There appeared to be a feel-ing of indifference of one area or locality to the adjacent one.

A rather significant and noteworthy activity was mentioned bytwo or three of the school officials in reference to the use of popula-tion, enrollment, and other pertinent data by the various communityagencies. In these cases, the research sections of the school dis-trict obtained the information, kept the records current, and fur-nished the information to the other city planning agencies. Theadvantage of this is, of course, that comparable data are used.

Design

Nearly two-thirds of the school officials indicated that they en-counter problems in designing rooms to accommodate team teach-ing, the use of electronic devices, and other programs or aids asthey are developed. The same number of officials reported problemsin planning mechanical services and equipment designed to minimizefuture difficulties in remodeling the building or making additions toit. Many of these problems arose out of limitations imposed on theoriginal design of the building by the construction methods used. Asecond consideration expressed by several respondents was thatconsiderably more research should be done to prove the value ofthese new teaching aids in order to justify the extensive and expen-sive remodeling which they necessitate in existing buildings.

Approximately one-third of the officials reported that they facedthe problem of designing school buildings for permanent, tempo-rary, and mobile use. This problem arose because of potentialchanges in the status of various neighborhoods- served by the schools.In several special instances, school officiati referred to their long-range program plans and showed how intervening expressway de-velopment projects or other community activities had completelychanged the plans. They were, therefore, thinking in terms of moreflexible planning of buildings to cope with these possibilities.

Very few problems relating to special design in school-facilitiesplanning were reported. Neighborhood schools and schools in high-rise apartment buildings were utilized in several instances. Design-


Credit: Montgomery Clonnty Pi Vie Rebook, Rockville, Yd.

Older school buildings can sometimes be adapted to permit the use of newer teachingtechniques: the placeriront of sliding partitionirin the classroom pictured here makesIt usable for either conventional. self-contcdned classroom instruction or for the newerconcept of team teaching.

ing buildings for cooperative use with other local agencies and in-dustries created few, if any, problems. Probably the most seriousproblem in this connection was scheduling the use of the buildingsfor these other purposes.

Problems of construction research and development were men-tioned by nearly two-thirds of the officials. The necessity for morecoordination of research that has already been done and for fundsand staff to conduct building-planning research was stressed.

Cre

dit:

Boa

rd o

f B

dito

atdo

lt of

tka

Oita

of

Net

o Y

ork

Gee

ing

the

mos

t "m

ileag

e" o

ut o

f a s

mal

l site

is a

gre

atch

alle

nge

i n b

uild

ing

urba

n sc

hool

s.T

he m

any

inge

niou

s w

ays

of d

oing

this

Man

de u

sing

a r

oof

as a

pla

y ar

ea.

In th

is a

rtis

t's c

once

ptio

n of

a p

rosp

ectiv

e ho

usin

g co

mpl

ex I

n N

ew Y

ork

Qty

. the

low

bui

ldin

gis

a s

choo

l; It

s ro

und

root

(ri

ght f

ront

) w

ill b

e a

play

are

a.

t


POPULATION MOVEMENT

45

The United States has rapidly become an urban nationnearly60 percent of our people now live in metropolitan areas. Two-thirds of thy increase in population between 1950 and 1959 occurredin these areas, and the greater part of future population increasesis most likely to be in the urban regions." While the population isconcentrating in areas that embrace multiple towns, cities, andsuburbs, sharp shifts of the population are occurring within theseareas. The population increase in the central cities of the SMSA'sduring the 10-year period of 1950-60 was 10.7 percent, whereas thepopulation increase in the parts of the SMSA's that lie outside thecentral cities was 48.6 percent. The latter areas accounted fornearly two-thirds of the total national population -tsowth." In someindividual cases, the population of the central cities actually de-clined. As indicated elsewhere, a large number of people moveddirectly from the central city to the suburban areas, and theirplaces were taken by migrants from farms and small towns. Thus,a substantial part of the central city population was rapidly becom-ing composed of lower income and minority groups. This tends tobring some of the cities' problems into focus.

In describing the effects of the changes in central-city population,Amos II. Hawley said:

The type of people who leave the central city for suburban residencehas an implication of another sort. They Include a disproportionatenumber of persons who, by virtue of their edu tional and occupationalachievement are actual and potential leaders. They are replaced bypersons who are much lens qualified for leadership positions thoughtheir progeny doubtlessly will gain those qualifications in time. Butmany of the leadership group who move away from the central citydo not relinquish their leadership positions. Through their activities asexecutives and specialists of various kinds they continue to influenceand often determine policies that have major Import for the centralcity . Thus there is a kind, of absentee ownership (or control) im-plicit in the suburban-ward movement of the higher social-economicresidents."

The impact of the population movements on school-facilities plan-ning in the metropolitan central cities was emphasized repeatedlyby School planning authorities. Rapid shifts in population withincities and the constant in-and-out migration of people affect. both

14 'Thomas F. Johnson and others. Renewing Amerioa's Cities. Washington :. Institutefor Social Science Research, 1962. p.

"U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of the Census. United litotes Census of Popu-lation DIP. Washington : U.S. Government Printing 0111ce, 1961.

Le Amos H. Hawley. op. cit


educational program planning and school building needs. A varietyof factors, including the numbers of people, their mobility, and theirsocial and economic backgrounds, are influential to some degree inevery phase of the school-facilities planning process. The two gen-eral problem areas related to population movements which werereferred to by/the school planning authorities were (1) socioeco-nomic implications and (2) the physical implications of thesemovements.

Socioeconomic Implications

As indicated in an earlier section, there is a great shift of the mid-dle class to the suburbs, while the central cities are becoming increas-ingly the place of residence for the impoverished. This move-ment is destructive of the heterogeneity of function, of purpose, andof people on which the viability of the modern urban community isdependent.'° Nearly every one of the school officials responding in-dicated that this was one of his major problems. The solid occu-pation of many neighborhoods by the economically and culturallydisadvantaged gradually leads to economic disasterinefficient landuse, traffic congestion, deterioration of businesses, low tax revenues,and high municipal costs." These changes affect the quality of theschool district attendance centers and subsequently the educationalprogram planning and school-facilities needs.

Closely related to this is the matter of seasonal migration withinthe school year, which results in over and under utilization of schoolbuildings. During the .winter many of the school buildings becomeseriously overcrowded because of the influx of migrant workers'children. During the spring, when the migrant workers take theirchildren out of school so that the entire family can follow crop plant-ing, cultivating, and harvesting, many classrooms are left unused.In terms of planning educational programs and buildings, this cre-ates serious problems, as nearly one-half of the school officials inter-viewed indicated.

Three-fourths of the officials said that they encountered problemsin trying to identify the effects of population replacement in theredeveloped areas and the areas adjacent to them. As large num-bers of people are uprooted and relocated, existing school facilitiesare crowded in numbers and ways that, are hard to predict.

IrWIlllam L Slayton. op. cit.M. Carter McFarland. op. cit., p. 15.


Moreover, the attitudes of the people in these areas, althoughunderstandable, add to the existing problems. These attitudesseem to he reflected in a weakening of the idea of the neighborhoodas a distinct community, with the school as its core. Approxi-mately one-half of the school officials indicated that this type ofloyal support has broken down.

These factors have caused serious problems in establishing andaccomplishing community goals; this problem was mentioned bynearly three-fourths of the respondents.

The actual physical problems caused by these socioeconomicproblems were closely related. A large majority of the school offi-cials indicated that the population movements not only createdproblems regarding the use of individual school buildings, but thatthey often created problems regarding entire school attendance orservice center boundaries. The necessity to constantly revise at-tendance boundary lines and shift pupils from one building toanother because of overcrowding affected transportation, programplanning, and staff relationships.

SITE LIMITATIONS

A successful educational program in each community is theresult of careful and prudent planning, directed toward goals andobjectives that are clearly stated and understood. Its continuedsuccess is also dependent upon projected programs not only of theschool but of the community itself. The school site is an integralpart of the overall educational program, and may either enhance orimpede its success. Several commonly accepted criteria for judg-ing the worth of a site are (1) the inherent health and safety factorsof the site, (2.) the suitability of the site for functional uses, (3) theeconomy of the site in terms of original and developmental costs,and (4) the capacity of the site's environment to stimulate apprecia-tion and pride in the total program.

There is no single or standard pattern by which all school sitesmay be judged, nor should there be if educational programs are

'rightfully designed for the individual needs of each neighborhoodor areas Each site should be evaluated in terms of how it can bestand most efficiently provide required spaces. There are certainbasic characteristics to look for in selecting a site and in estimat-ing its future value. These charactiOristice are (1) the location ofthe site in relation to the present and future school population tobe served, (2) the size and suitability of the site to accommodate the

48 -PROBLEMS IN PLANNING

Credit: Chicago Public Schools

This new elementcay school in Chicago is attended by many pupils from high-rise publichousing projects nearby.. The three separate sections were designed to allow a highdegree of decentralized intiltniction.

buildings needed and spaces for outdoor activities, and (3) thephysical features of the site which will permit the efficient adapta-tion and development for continued use. There are generally ac-cepted suggestions for minimum acreages for school sites. It-isoften impossible in the metropolitan central cities to obtain sites aslarge as desirable because of high land costs and the scarcity ofopen land in the areas of greatest need.

More than three-fourths of the school officials reported land ac-quisition to be one of their serious planning problems. Severelimitations are often imposed because of the scarcity of land in theproper locations; the characteristics of available sites often restrictthe building design.

Public school districts, as duly constituted governmental units,may exercise the right, of eminent domain to obtain needed land forschool sites. In several instances, however, the officials indicatedthat they were hesitant to use this means because of the time andextra expense involved and because of the possibility of creatingunfavorable public opinion. A facet of this problem reported bynearly one-half of the school officials was speculation and conse-quent inflationary costs of land for potential school sites. Officialsof one city reported that the school district had to pay $21/2 million


for a site, equivalent in size to 2 city blocks on which to build a com-plete high school for more than 2,000 pupils. There were relativelyfew instances reported in which pressure groups promoted the pur-chase of inadequate and costly school sites.

More than one-half of the respondents said that many of theirproblems stemmed from costs for site clearance and developmentfor buildings.

COMMUNITY RELATIONS

A successful program of planning and providing needed school fa-cilities is dependent upon a thorough, communitywide understand-ing of the total educational program desired. General publicapproval is necessary at various stages of the planning, particularlyin'places where legal requirements demand a vote of the people orof another governmental agency. Financing of educational pro-grams and facilities to accommodate the programs is done largelythrough local funds, and depends upon general agreement from thecommunity on the values and needs of the program.

The problem becomes more apparent when it is realized that in1961, 3.7 percent of the revenue receipts of public elementary andsecondary schools came from the Federal Government, about 39.2percent from the State governments, and about 57.1 percent from thelocal governments.2' State and local governmental expenditures forall public education in 1961 amounted to some $20.6 billion, or 36.6percent of the expenditures for all purposes. Total expenses forpublic schools in 1961-62 amounted to 4.4 percent of4.otal personalincome."

The essence of successful community relations is a sound, business-like approach to the task of supplying those educational serviceswhioh the community wants. Experience in working with municipalgovernments has demonstrated the competency of the community (1)to determine essential values and ultimate objectives, and (2) towork cooperatively through its leaders and its experts toward desir-able and highly constructive ends."

Such factors as shifts in population, transient neighborhoods, andeconomic and educational backgrounds which affect school-facilitiesplanning are particular problems in the area of promoting goodcommunity relations. Many of the people in the metropolitan cen-

si National 1241oestton Aseoelation. NBA Reavearck Brlleflw, February 1968. Washing-ton : The Association, 1201 16th Street NW., p. 8.

Ihid., p. 9.W. H. Strerell and A. I. Burke. Op. eft, p. 847.


tral cities have not established permanent roots in the particularcommunity and consequently have not formed loyalties needed tosupport many of the local projects.

In identifying problems of community relations in planning schoolfacilities, approximately 30 percent of the school planning officialsreported difficulties in their efforts to inform other governmentalagencies and the general public about educational and buildingprograms. Several did indicate that many of the citizens in theircommunities took an interest in their own neighborhoods but werenot concerned with the overall school district policies. One-halfof the respondents said that they had encountered problems indescribing the complexities of school-facilities planning problemsto the public. A large part of this was due, they thought. to thegeneral apathy of the citizens in their communities. Approxi-mately one-half of the school officials said that they had encoun-tered problems in securing cooperation from other governmentalagencies and the general public to determine school building needs.There seemed to be a ,feeling of competition among the agencies ina few of the cities. All agreed that an awareness of school-facilitiesplanning problems by all of the governmental and other responsibleagencies, as well as by the general public, is essential.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adams, Robert Y. "Urban Area Problems and Industrial Expansion," inProceedings of the Governor's Conference on Urban Area Problems(held May 25-27, 1958), Bloomington, Ind. : Indiana University. Mimeo-graphed report.

Adrian, Charles R. Governing Urban America. New York : McGraw -Hill,1961.

Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. Governmental Struc-ture, Organization and Planning in Metropolitan Areas. Washington :U.S. Government Printing Office, 1961.

American Association of School Administrators. Planning America's SchoolBuildings. Washington : The Association, 1960.

American Institute of Planners. Urban Renewal. Washington : The Insti-tute, 1959.

Ball, Charles. "Milwaukee Land Use and Zoning," Traffic Quarterly (13:579-4301) October 1959.

Beach, Fred F. "State AidNew Hope for City Schools," School Life.Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, May 1902.

Brown, Albert Bush. "Agency Promoting Urban StudyJoint Center forUrban Studies," Progressive Architecture (42 : 66), September 1961.

Brown, Robert Kevin. "The ROle of Local Initiative in Urban Renewal," inThe Atlantic Economic Review (9: 3-7), January 1959.

('lair, William H. "Urban Renewal and Transportation," in Traffic Quar-terly (13: 414-422), July 1959.

Committee on Government Operations. Government in Metropolitan Areas.Washing-ton : U.S. Government Printing Office, 1962.

"Congress Gets Urban Affairs Bill." In Engineering News-Record (166 : 23).Apr. 20, 1961.

Creighton, R. L. "Urban Expressways; Joint Planning of Transportationand Land Use," in Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engi-neers (CP 1, No. 2048: 1-5), June 1959.

Dickman, R. L. "Urban Renewal and Federal Legislation," In Civil Engi-neering (30: 43-45), October 1960.

Federal Grants to States for Elementary and Secondary Schools. (Hearingsbefore the General Subcommittee on Education of the Committee onEducation and Labor, House of Represenatives, 87th Cong., '2d seas.,on H.R. 10180, Part I ). Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office,1962.

"Federal Housing Budget Sets a Record," in Architectural Forum (116:7),March 1962.

Feiss, Carl. "Planning Absorbs Zoning," in Journal of the American Insti-tute of Planners (27: 121-126). Washington : The Institute, May 1961.

51

A


Final Report of the Highway Coat Allocation Study (House Document No.72). U.S. Government Printing Office, 1961.

Fire Equipment Manufacturers' Association, Inc. F.E.M.A. Handbook ofSafety Codes. Pittsburgh, Pa. : The Association, 1959.

"Fitting Cities to the Future," in Engineering News-Record ( 166 : 30-32),Feb. 16,1961.

"Freeways : Role? Necessity? Cost? Location? Impact?" in The Common-wealth Part II (37), January 1961.

Gruen, V. "Emerging Urban Pattern,"115-162), July 1959.

Harris, Britton. "Some Problems in the Theory of Intra-Urban Location,"in Operations Research (9: 695-720), September-October 1961.

Hawley, Amos H. "The Challenge of Population Change," In MichiganMunicipal Review (34: 5-7), January 1961.

Herrick, John H., and others. From School Program, to School Plant.New York : Henry Holt & Co., Inc., 1956.

Highway Research Board. Land Acquisition and Economic Impact Studies-1958 (Bulletin 189). Washington : National Academy of Sciences, NationalResearch Council, 1958.

. .Urban Transportation Planning Concepts and Application (Bulletin293). Washington : National Academy of Sciences, National ResearchCouncil, 1961.

Housing and Home Finance- Agency. Housing Definitions. Washington :U.S. Goverr.ment Printing Office, 1959.

, Urban Renewal. Washington : U.S. Government Printing Office, De-cember 1959.

. Urban Renewal Notes. Washington : Urban Renewal Administra-tion, November-December 1962.

. "Design in Urban Renewal," in Urban Renewal Notes, July-Au-gust 1963. Washington : Urban Renewal Administration.

"How Should We Plan Our Cities?" in Engineering News- Record (161:

in Progressive Architecture (40:

21-22), Dec. 18.1958.Howard, John T. "Integrated Pia

434), October 1960.Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Lif

Random House, 1961.Johnson, Thomas F., and others

ton : Institute for Social ScienceKusche, Ray D. "Importance of

Proceedings of American Sac2891 : 21-8), August 1961.

Leach, Richard H. "New Urban Cha n e." In National Civic Review (48°-484), October 1961.

. "The Federal Urban Renewal ProgramA Ten Year Critique," InLaw and Contemporary Problems, Part I (25: 777-792). Autumn 1960.

Lindsey, J. V. "Mee of Our Cities ; Plea for Cabinet-Level Representationof the Cities and a Department of Urban Affairs," in Progressive Archi-tecture (41: 164-167), September 1960.

McChesney, Frank. "Trends and Prospects in Regional Planning," In PublicManagement (43: 98-102), May 1961.

nning." in Traffic Quarterly (13 : 419-

e of Great American Cities. New York :

Renewing America's Cities. Washing-Research, 1962.Regional Airport System Planning," in

of Civil Engineering (87 Al 2, No.


McFarland, M. Carter. The Challenge of Urban Renewal (Technical Bul-letin 84). Washington : Urban Land Institute, 1968.

McGilly, Frank J. "The Study of the Economic Impact of Urban Express-ways Upon Adjacent Areas," in Civic Affairs. Toronto : Bureau ofMunicipal Research, 1960.

Merriam, Robert E. "A Federal Look at Urban Problems," in Tam Review(22 : 5-8), February 1961.

Metropolitan Area Problems (report on conference on Metropolitan AProblems, held at Atlanta, Ga. ; Emory University, Apr. 10-12, 1961).

Metropolitan Study Commission, Land Use and Zoning Committee. LandIlse Planning and Control in Milwaukee County. Milwaukee : TheCommission, Oct. 2, 1959. (Mimeographed.)

. Report of the Executive Committee. Milwaukee : The Commission,1958. (Mimeographed.)

Mitchel, Robert B. "The New Frontier in Metropolitan Planning," inAmerican Institute of Planners Journal (27: 169-175), August 1961.

"Mobilizing the City Resources for Redevelopment," in Engineering News-Record (185: 58-56), Oct. 18, 1960.

Mumford, Lewis. "The Future of the City," in Architectural Record (121-128) , October 1962.

. "Yesterday's City of Tomorrow," in Architectural Record (139.-144), November 1962.

. "Megalopolis as Anti-City," in Architectural Record (101-108),December 1962.

"Beginnings of Urban Integration," in Architectural Record (119-125) , January 1963.

"Social Complexity and Urban Design,", in Architectural Record(119-126), February 1963.

National Board of Fire Underwriters', Committee on Engineering. FireSafe Schools. New York : The Board, 1959.

National Council on Schoolhouse Construction. Guide for Planning SchoolPlants (1958 edition). East Lansing, Mich. : The Council, MichiganState University.

National Education Association. NRA Research Bulletin ( VoL 41, No. 1).Washington : The Association, February 1968.

National Fire Protection Association. Building Exits Code (NFPA No.101). Boston : The Association, 1960, p. 86.

Office of Statistical Standards. Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas.Executive Office of the President, Bureau of the Budget. Washington :U.S. Government Printing Office, 1961.

o'Harrew, Dennis. "Realism in Community Development," in The Ten-nessee Planner (21: 9-18), September 1961.

"Philadelphia Rebuilds to a 21st Century Plan," in Engineering News-Record (186: 43-52), Oct. 18, 1960.

Rawson, Mary. Property Taxation and Urban Development (Research Mono -.graph 4). Washington : Urban Land Institute, 1961.

Sagamore Conference on Highways and Urban Development. Guidelines forAction. Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University, 1969.

Schroeder, Alfred H. "What the Building Code Means to the Public," inMinnesota Municipalities (50-52), February 1961.

54 ROBLEMS IN PLANNING

Scott, Mel. "Central City Responsibility for Area Planning," in PublicManagement (43: 102-104), May 1961.

Slayton, William L. "Colleges, Universities, and Urban Renewal," in HigherEducation ( 28 : 6-7).- Washington : U.S. Government Printing Office,March 1962.

. "State and Local Incentives and Techniques for Urban Renewal,"in Law and Contemporary Problems (25: 793-812), Autumn 1960.

"The Influance of Urban Renewal on Education," in School Life.Washington : U.S. Government Printing Office, June 1962.

Smith, Wilbur, and associates. The Impact of Highways on Selected PublicServices (Prepared for the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau ofPublic Roads). New Haven, Conn. 1960.

Strevell, W. H., and A. J. Burke. School Building ProgramsAdministrationof the School Building Program. New York : McGraw-Hill. 1959.

Taylor, J. L School SitesSelection, Development, and Utilization. (SpecialPublication No. 7). U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,Office of Education. Washington : U.S. Government Printing Office, 1958.

Thiel, Floyd. Social Effects of Modern Highway Transportation. Washing-ton : U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Public Roads. 1961.(Mimeographed.)

Tiebout, Charles M. "Economic Analysis of Urban Problems : with Discussion,"in American Economic Review (51 : 271-278), May 1961.

Tsaguris, John S. ''Urban Expressways : Highway Engineer and City Planner,"in Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers (Cp 1, No. 2049:7-13). June 1959.

Tanner, Christopher. "America's Super-Cities," in Harpers Magazine (217:60-61), August 1958.

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. United States Censusof Population, 1960. Washington : U.S. Government Printing Office, 1961.

. Bureau of Public Roads. America's Lifelines. Federal Aid forHighways. Washington : U.S. Government Printing Office, 1962.

Urban Mast Transportation-196f. (Hearings before the Committee onCommerce, U.S. Senate, 87th Cong., 2d sees., on S. 3815). Washington :U.S. Government Printing Office, 1962.

Wall, Ned L. "Developments in Municipal Housing Codes," in Public Manage-ment (42: 107-109, May 1960).

"Where Urban Renewal Is," in Architectural Record (125: 330), April 1959.Wilkinson, Joseph F. "Interstate Highway Construction Can Make or Break

a City," in Engineering News-Record (165: 26-30), September 15, 1960.

APPENDIX A

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION,AND WELFAREOffice of Education

Washington 25, D.C.

Interview Guide

CHARACTERISTIC METROPOLITAN SCHOOL FACILITIESPLANNING PROBLEMS

Definitions: 1. Major problemThe problem isserious

2. Minor problemThere is a prob-lem

3. Solved problemThe problemonce existed, but it has beensolved

4. No problemThe problem doesnot exist in the school system

I. Problems Created by Urban Renewal ProjectsA. Cost and financing

1. Removal of property from the tax rolls in a re-development area, thereby causing the need tosupplement local funds or to curtail expenditures

II un ti I the newly developed property is placed onthe tax roll which affectsa. Necessity for replacement of school buildings

and sitesb. Required new services ia school system even

though the problems caused outside thesystem__

o. Effects on general building operational pro-oedures

2. 11;1)nitiststfiteld liuti:Sttitrfinawlhrwberopeimtheamoney oroccurs

3. Determining an acceptable formula for Federal,State, and local agencies to underwrite the east ofredevelopment area

4. Permanent loss of tax funds because of publichousing

Degree o problemseriousness

I

55


Degree of problemseriousness

11

I. Problems Created by Urban Renewal ProjectsCon.11- Planning

I. Getting urban renewal authorities to plan co-operatively with school officials for the schoolor schools needed in a redevelopment area _ _ _ _ _

2. Obtaining effective school representation on cityplanning commission

3. Unpredictable demands for school facilities arisingfrom the timing in completion of urban renewalprojects

4. Recognition by urban renewal authorities thatthe school serves as an anchor for a neighbor-hood and thus must be the focal point of aproposed renewal project

C. Population1. Identifying areas of relocation of persons who are

displaced by urban renewal projects2. The economic and social effects on the areas in-

volved in urban renewal projects one. Redevelopment areasb. Adjacent areas

3. Shifts in population whicha. Change the number of attendance centers or

districts within the school systemb. Lower educational quality of an attendance

centerc. Change the ethnic and racial make-up of the

attendance centerI). School sites

1. Availability of sites:a. New or additional sites neededb. Replacement of former sitesc. Utilization of existing sites within the project

area2. Urban renewal developers who

a. Dictate educational requirements for.site size_ _b. Apply pressure to build large buildings on

small sitesc. Fail to approve desirable school sites

E. Zoning1. Lack of regulations which permit potential degen-

eration of city areas because of the impact of re-development

2. Political implications which allow -bypassing oflocal ordinances to the advantage of urban re-newal developers

3. Revised zoning regulations which permit highdensity of residential population

F. Legislation1. Intricacies of legislation affecting urban renewal

at the following levels:a. Federalb. Statec. Local

URBAN SCHOOL FACILME6

I. Pfoblema Created by Urban Renewal ProjectsCon.G. Authority and control

1. Determination of which agency has authority andjurisdiction in redevelopment areas. This in-cludes such agencies as the school district, cityplanning commission, health department, agenciesat the Federal level

2. Undue influence urban renewal developers exerton thea. School systemb. Citywide where it affects the school system

H, Design1. Urban renewal policies which govern or restrict

the design of school buildingsIL Problems Created by Expressway Development

A. Cost and financing1. Difficulty of being reimbursed for school sites or

portions of sites which are preempted by express-ways

2. Loss of revenue due to property being removedfrom tax rolls for expressways

3. Costs of replacing school sites which have been

B. Planning1. Expressways planned in advance of the time such

information is made available to school authori-ties

2. Changing and/or conflicting information regard-ing advanced planning for expressway develop-ment

-r-3. Coordinating leadership and cooperation betweenadjoining school districts into which expresswaysextend

4. Limited access to exprepsways which increasepupil transportation outs

5. Willingness of State and city expressway author-ities to plan cooperatively with school officials

8. Psychological impact of expressways whichdivide established school service or attendanceareas

7. Tendency of expressway developers to plan routesfrom school site to school site because of ease ofobtaining school lands_

C. Authority and control1. Determination of who has final authority of land

condemnationschool system, expressway de-velopers, or city council_

2. Expressway developers preemptThg school systemproperty

3. Leek of local control over expressway planners

57

Decree of problemseriousness

2


Degree of problemeerlonaeme

Ii

1x

3z§

III. Problems Created by Zoning RegulationsA. Planning

1. Obtaining the cooperation of the city plannersdrawing up master zoning plans

2. Zoning regulations which are changed because ofpolitical pressures

3. City planning commission that attempts tocontrol location of school sites

4. Effects of concentration of population due to highrise apartments and/or other types oi residentialbuildings

5. Zoning regulations which are inconsistent inregulating or controlling concentration of popula-tion in one area

B. Zoning1. Requirements for school site utilization, such as

parking facilities, etc2. Temporary delays in securing school sites due to

zoning regulationsIV. Problems Created by Building CodesLocal and

StateA. Planning

1. Codes regulating the use of temporary buildings2. Codes which are revised as a result of political

pressures3. Old school buildings which violate new building

code regulations4. Code requirements of the following specific areas

which affects educational planning:a. Number of sanitary facilitiesb. Heating and ventilatingo. Fire safetyd. Other

5. Increased costs because of excessive code regula-tions

6. Building codes which are outdated7. Unwritten building codes enforced by local

officials8. Lack of uniformity and the inconsistency of fire

safety codes9. Procedures for condemnation of hazardous school

buildingsB. Authority and control

1. Determination of which agency has final jurisdie-tion in cases where building code conflicts exist

2. State and local agencies using different proceduresto enforce varying building codes. (Some atespecifications and others are performance stand-ards)

3. Multiplicity of State and local agencies whichreauire approval of building clans

_t_


IV. Problems Created by Building CodesContinuedB. Authority and controlContinued

4. The school system, as an agency of the State,being subject to the codes of such local agenciesasa. Fire departmentb. LBoard of healthc. Water and sewage commissiond. Others

5. Regulations which affect specific distance thatschool buildings must be set back from the road _

6. Aeronautical regulations regarding specified dis-tance a school site must be from an airport

7. Regulations affecting distance school buildingsmust be from saloons, railroads, churches, andcemeteries

V. Problems Created by Construction Costs and FinancingRegulations

A. CostsI. Excessive labor and materials costs2. Establishing valid cost comparisons, such as

s. Building and unit costsb. Construction costs to educational efficiency__ _

c. Standardization to avoid conflicting reportingpolicies

d. Methods of computing school building capac-ities and utilization

e. Method of computing community utilization_ _

f. Method of computing instructional spaceg. Methods of estimating pupil unit capacity_ __ _h. Others

3. Inconsistency of contractor bidding procedures _

4. Inconsistency of contractual patterns5. Stringent and/or excessive code requirements

which affect construction costaB. Financial regulations

1. Universal methods of budgeting and accounting2. Methods and procedures of bidding school con-

struction bonds3. Establishment of good community rating for

bonding purposes4. Prorating cost of building with respect to demoli-

tion costs, street repair costs, etc5. Prorating building costs into such areas as site

purchase, construction, furniture, equipment,bond interest, etc

8. Vested interest groups who can influence prices_ _

7. The coat of research relative to planning8. State regulations pertaining to debt limitations

C. Planning1. Cost of cooperation with other agencies on plan-

ning problems (extra time taken, etc.)2. Determination of a basis for granting matching

Federal funds, if such funds were to be available3. Increasing enrollments and other factors which

delay the removal of obsolete buildings

59


z


Degree of problemeerlougnm

C

V. Problems Created by Construction Costs and FinancingRegulationsContinued

I). Construction and design1. Incorporation of flexibility and adaptability in a

building2. Supervision to obtain high-quality construction

at a reasonable cost3. Conventional or traditional designs because of

legal restriction4. Designing convertible and demountable schools5. Developing characteristic building designs for

metropolitan areas, such as multistory, play-ground on roof, etc

6. Establishing criteria to determine the value of abuilding for remodeling and zehabilitation

7. Restriction of building design because of sitelimitations

VI. Problems Created by Educational Program PlanningA. Planning

1. Planning for an educational program bya. Providing adaptable and flexible buildings__ _

b. Visualizing future educational programsc. Planning for efficient utilization of building

spaced. Encouraging designers to be experimentale. Providing a statement of educational use__

2. Pressure of vested interest groups to incorporatenonessential areas in school buildings

3. Determination of the portion of the total districtbuilding program which should be permanentconstruction and the portion which should betemporary construction_

4. Cooperative planninga. Between the local system and private and

parochial schoolsh. Among the local system and Federal, State,

and other local and private agenciesc. Between the local system and contiguous

system, especially in annexation casesd. ese of comparable enrollment and other data

by the school research section and otheragencies

B. Design1. Designing rooms to accommodate changing idea.

or programs such as team teaching, use of elec-tronic devices, and other programs or aide as theyare developed

:2. Planning mechanical services and equipment tominimize building problems in future remodelingor additions

3. Designing buildings fora. Permanent useb. Temporary use (10 -15 years)c. Mobile use



i. x ci z

VI. Problems Created by Educational Program Plan-ningContinued

B. DesignContinued4. Special design:

a. Elementary schools in high-rise apartmentsb. Windowless rooms or buildingsc. Schools which provide fallout protectiond. Facilities to accommodate special programs

such asIndustry initiated programsPeripheral programsSenior citizen centered programsSalable skills programs

5. Designing schools for experimental programs8. Knowing what a comprehensive school program is

so that a building may be adequately designed7. Designing a building which will be integrated into

the community it serves8. Lack of coordination of research:

a. Building designb. Environmental controlo. Other

9. Need for money to conduct building planningresearch

___

VII. Problems Created by Population MigrationA. Socioeconomic implications

1. Movement of low income families to congestedareas

2. Migration of racial and ethnic groups:a. Rapid changes which affect quality of attend-

ance centersb. Rapid changes which affect programs and con-

sequent building needs3. Seasonal migration within the school year which

results in over and under utilization of buildings_4. Identification of the effects of population replace-

ment in the redeveloped and adjacent areas5. The school serving as the "anchor" or the core of

a neighborhood8. Forecast planning for long-range community

goalsB. Physical implications

1. Population movements which change needs forschool buildings

2. Population movements which require changingschool attendance or service center boundaries___

3. Coordination of census gathering between and/oramong the school system and other agencies

VIII. Problems Created by Site LimitationsA. Obtaining appropriate and adequate sitesB. Site characteristics which restrict or control the

building designC. Lepl implications of

I. Eminent domain t2. Deed restrictions3. Parking reauirements on sites


VIII. Problems Created by Site LimitationsContinuedD. Speculation on land, thus inflated costa of potential

school sitesE. Pressure groups which promote the purchase of inad-

equate and costly school sitesF. Excessive site demolition, clearance, and develop-

ment costsIX. Problems of Public Relations Activities

A. Informing other government agencies and the generalpublic regarding-1. Educational and building programs2. Complexities of the school facilities planning

problemsB. Securing the cooperation of other governmental

agencies and the general public in determining schoolbuilding needs

Degree of problem

7.

APPENDIX B

Regional Offices of the Housing and Home Finance Agency

Region I: Room 906, 346 Broadway, New York 18, N.Y.; Maine, NewHampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, NewYork.

Region II: Room 1004, Widener Building, Chestnut and Juniper Streets.Philadelphia 7, Pa.; New Jersey, Maryland, Delaware, District of Co-lumbia, West Virginia, Virginia, Pennsylvania.

Region III: Room 645, Peachtree-Seventh Building, Atlanta 23, Ga.; Ken-tucky, Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama,Mississippi, Florida.

Region IV: Room 2000, Bankers Building, 105 West Adams Street, Chicago3, Ill.; Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota,North Dakota, South Dakota. Nebraska.

Region V: Room 2000, Federal Center, 800 West. Vickery Boulevard, FortWorth 4, Tex. ; Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas,Colorado, New Mexico.

Region VI: 3d floor, 989 Market Street, San Francisco 3, Calif.; Washington.Oregon, California, Idaho, Nevada, Arizona, Utah, Montana, Wyoming,Alaska, Hawaii, Guam.

Region VII: 1608 Ponce de Leon Avenue, Post Office Box 9093, Santurce 17,P.R.; Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.

63

U.S GOVERN RENT PRINTINC MX/ 10314 0-717-013

Documents

PROBLEMS IN PLANNING URBAN SCHOOL FACILITIES · SCHOOL PLANT ADMINISTRATION SERIES PROBLEMS IN PLANNING URBAN SCHOOL FACILITIES I 0E-21023 Bulletin 1964, No. 23 By WILLIAM W. CHASE,